Comment 4 for bug 907808

Based on my mis-reading a log line, that is.

I'd like to see this addressed now as users are definitely complaining about this. I think we need to sit down and figure out two things:
1) What actual actions can we say for all hypervisors should not be allowed at the same time?
2) What is the best place to prevent those from happening?

Unfortunately, I think the spec is incorrect in this case and should be updated to reflect how users actually want to use this, once we decide on which can be allowed at the same time. In any case our API reports statuses indicating its been queued, so it should be fine to queue things in some way, regardless of the current state of the machine. I think this is a case where we took the spec as definitive for defining state transitions in the blueprint, and we shouldn't have done that. Obviously this discussion would have been ideal on the bp discussion, but we missed that.

Aside from that, there are a number of other states that reporting 409s with the current implementation, where they are reported as ACTIVE and still returning a 409.

Prior to making our long term decisions, I would be ok with seeing the change backed out, certainly something should be done.