You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Improve Template/ISO Failure Status and Error Reporting #11326
Description:
In the ISO/Templates flow, error responses currently return detailed error messages directly in the status field. This leads to inconsistencies and complicates error handling.
Proposal:
Introduce two improvements to the API responses for Templates and ISOs:
Standardize the status Field for Failures
When any terminal error occurs during the processing of a template or ISO, the status field should consistently return "Failed". This provides a clear and unambiguous final state for parsing.
Add a Detailed Error Message Field
A new field, named error_details, should be added to the Template/ISO API response object.
This field will contain a detailed error string explaining the reason for the failure.
Example of the response
Failed download status of the ISO/Template:
{
"id": "a1b2c3d4-xxxx-yyyy-zzzz-e5f6g7h8i9j0",
"name": "my-failed-template",
"status": "Failed",
"error_details": "HTTP Server returned 404 (expected 200 OK)",
....
}
This issue is stale because it has been open for 120 days with no activity. It may be removed by administrators of this project at any time. Remove the stale label or comment to request for removal of it to prevent this.
Hi @DaanHoogland
What do you think about prioritizing this issue as a bug?
While testing, I noticed that the status field remains empty for ISOs and templates. For example, in the new "Upload from local" for Volume workflow, volumes correctly return the upload status through uploaderrormsg and related status fields, but similar information is not available for ISOs and templates.
Would it make sense to implement a status flow for ISOs and templates similar to the one already used for volumes? This would provide more consistent behavior across different upload workflows and make it easier for users to understand the current upload state and troubleshoot failures.
Hi @DaanHoogland What do you think about prioritizing this issue as a bug?
prioritising and marking as bug have little to no correlation , @Yuliia7-1
While testing, I noticed that the status field remains empty for ISOs and templates. For example, in the new "Upload from local" for Volume workflow, volumes correctly return the upload status through uploaderrormsg and related status fields, but similar information is not available for ISOs and templates.
It makes sense to align this functionality. Maybe you can bring this to the attention of the developer implemting the new uploadVolume workflow? I am not sure how much work this would be.
Would it make sense to implement a status flow for ISOs and templates similar to the one already used for volumes? This would provide more consistent behavior across different upload workflows and make it easier for users to understand the current upload state and troubleshoot failures.
Activity
github-actions commentedon Dec 18, 2025
This issue is stale because it has been open for 120 days with no activity. It may be removed by administrators of this project at any time. Remove the stale label or comment to request for removal of it to prevent this.
github-actions commentedon Jan 6, 2026
This issue was closed because it has been stale for 120 days with no activity.
Yuliia7-1 commentedon Jul 6, 2026
Hi @DaanHoogland
What do you think about prioritizing this issue as a bug?
While testing, I noticed that the status field remains empty for ISOs and templates. For example, in the new "Upload from local" for Volume workflow, volumes correctly return the upload status through uploaderrormsg and related status fields, but similar information is not available for ISOs and templates.
Would it make sense to implement a
statusflow for ISOs and templates similar to the one already used for volumes? This would provide more consistent behavior across different upload workflows and make it easier for users to understand the current upload state and troubleshoot failures.DaanHoogland commentedon Jul 13, 2026
prioritising and marking as bug have little to no correlation , @Yuliia7-1
It makes sense to align this functionality. Maybe you can bring this to the attention of the developer implemting the new uploadVolume workflow? I am not sure how much work this would be.
agreed.