From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D9E18C03
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 16:03:01 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 464F621771
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 16:02:31 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
[94.136.29.106])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 16:02:30 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 92EC944D6A;
Wed, 16 Nov 2022 16:02:30 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <1d046d42-edfb-47db-912a-2b53d9a8f936@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 16:02:30 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:107.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/107.0
To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>,
Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20221115130248.1007325-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
<20221115130248.1007325-20-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
<b1d3fe96-0d5f-7895-4b0f-afc30869ccf7@proxmox.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <b1d3fe96-0d5f-7895-4b0f-afc30869ccf7@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: =?UTF-8?Q?0=0A=09?=AWL 0.065 Adjusted
score from AWL reputation of From: =?UTF-8?Q?address=0A=09?=BAYES_00 -1.9
Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict
=?UTF-8?Q?Alignment=0A=09?=NICE_REPLY_A -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A)
SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF
=?UTF-8?Q?Record=0A=09?=SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH manager v10 09/13] ui: add form/TagEdit.js
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 15:03:01 -0000
On 11/16/22 16:00, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
> subject -> s!form/TagEdit.js!PVE.panel.TagEditContainer component!
>
> Am 15/11/2022 um 14:02 schrieb Dominik Csapak:
>> +Ext.define('PVE.panel.TagEditContainer', {
>> + extend: 'Ext.container.Container',
>> + alias: 'widget.pveTagEditContainer',
>
> nit: slightly odd that this is pveABC while in the previous patch you used
> pmxABC, I guess the former lifted in widget-toolkit initially ^^
>
>
you're right, i'll change the pmxTag to pveTag since it lives in pve currently anyway...