Why was this changed? Seems strange to me, looks like you actually want an unmanaged host and not a managed host that's !build. (Maybe revert after #10413?)

It was prerequisite to the Host Unification design feature team. I was following what validate_media? outlines in managed hosts model. The goal is for a user to be able to create a host that may or may not want to use puppet, but still be able to manage puppet, so I don't think the unmanaged host is the solution. Correct me if I'm wrong, but in unmanaged, users don't manage puppet, correct?

Christine Fouant wrote:

The goal is for a user to be able to create a host that may or may not want to use puppet, but still be able to manage puppet, so I don't think the unmanaged host is the solution. Correct me if I'm wrong, but in unmanaged, users don't manage puppet, correct?

Yes, that's incorrect, an unmanaged host is typically just for Puppet with no provisioning support.

Install media was already checking for 'build?', so i guess that was wrong as well.

There also isn't a way to create an unmanaged host in the UI is there? Granted that may be a separate feature, but we were using the UI to guide us as to how to implement this it may have been what led us astray (as we were following the install media example).

err, i guess the validate_media? method is checking for managed as well, but from a user perspective using the UI and trying to make a host with as little information as possible, this seemed to be the 'right' solution. I can see how using managed? would be better.

Yeah, I don't think the media check is right either - validation should probably be consistent irrespective of the state of the host, and only dependent on the type.

It's not possible to create an unmanaged host when in unattended mode. We're tracking some of this under #10413 to unify it a bit.