6447e61078
My suggestion is that this table isn’t sufficiently useful to keep around with the combinatoric explosion of other lifecycle phases. The logic was that someone might wonder “why isn’t my main task starting?” and this table would show that the prestart tasks hadn’t yet completed. One might wonder the same about any task that has prerequisites, so should a poststart task have a table that shows main tasks? And so on. Since the route hierarchy guarantees that one has already passed through a template that shows the lifecycle chart before one can reach the template where this table is displayed, I believe this table is redundant. It also conveys information in a more abstract way than the chart, which is dense and more easily understood, to me. |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| allocations/allocation | ||
| clients | ||
| csi | ||
| jobs | ||
| servers | ||
| settings | ||
| .gitkeep | ||
| application.js | ||
| clients.js | ||
| exec.js | ||
| jobs.js | ||
| servers.js | ||