Inconsistent behavior in the checks to delete a node

[Raphaël Badin]

One cannot remove an 'Allocated' node but MAAS allows a 'Deploying' or a 'Deployed' node to be deleted. This is inconsistent.

[Jason Hobbs (jason-hobbs)]

I disagree with the premise that it doesn't make sense to allow an Admin to delete a node that is owned by a user. The problem with releasing first is that releasing the node powers the node off, and that breaks at least one existing customer's use case. I think it's always a useful option to delete a node at any time without having any affect on the node itself, and the issue here is just one of needing to make the admin aware that the node is allocated to a user.

I think the better fix here would be to remove the restriction on deleting the node the Allocated state, and make the warning clearer about what's going on.

[Jason Hobbs (jason-hobbs)]

To be clear, the reason I don't think this should be 'fixed' is I think admins should always have a way to delete a node that isn't dependent on the state of the node, and doesn't change the state of the node. If the admin wants to power the node off before deleting it, fine, he can release it or mark it broken first. But if he wants to remove the node from MAAS without changing the node's state, because perhaps the node is doing something useful after being deployed with MAAS, then deleting while deployed/deploying must be allowed. This allows use of MAAS to bootstrap a system that doesn't necessarily need to be managed with MAAS from there on out.

[Andres Rodriguez (andreserl)]

I agree with Jason here:

- A admin should be able to delete a node that's in ANY state.
- A user should not be able to delete a node at all.

[Raphaël Badin (rvb)]

All right, the only thing I really care about is consistency here. Since you've made a good case for why it makes sense to delete an allocated, I've repurposed the bug.