From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <a.antreich@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) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1687961004
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 14:42:40 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 04F8B2546D
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 14:42:40 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
[212.186.127.180])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 50EC02545F
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 14:42:38 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1A72845CDF
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 14:42:38 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 14:42:35 +0200
From: Alwin Antreich <a.antreich@proxmox.com>
To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
Message-ID: <20201012124235.GA235013@dona.proxmox.com>
Mail-Followup-To: Alwin Antreich <a.antreich@proxmox.com>,
pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
References: <20200925125146.1945521-1-a.antreich@proxmox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200925125146.1945521-1-a.antreich@proxmox.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL 0.000 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
medium trust
SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH docs 1/2] move footnote of Ceph's intro into
TIP section
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: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 12:42:40 -0000
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 02:51:45PM +0200, Alwin Antreich wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Alwin Antreich <a.antreich@proxmox.com>
> ---
> Note: The footnote in the title section broke the link building for that
> footnote when used with a variable on the beginning of the url.
> The parser seems to look for an http(s) and considers it text
> otherwise. But interestingly it worked with the other footnotes.
>
> Should my note rather go into the commit message?
>
> pveceph.adoc | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/pveceph.adoc b/pveceph.adoc
> index baf0988..0f94b97 100644
> --- a/pveceph.adoc
> +++ b/pveceph.adoc
> @@ -58,12 +58,14 @@ and VMs on the same node is possible.
> To simplify management, we provide 'pveceph' - a tool to install and
> manage {ceph} services on {pve} nodes.
>
> -.Ceph consists of a couple of Daemons footnote:[Ceph intro https://docs.ceph.com/docs/{ceph_codename}/start/intro/], for use as a RBD storage:
> +.Ceph consists of a couple of Daemons, for use as a RBD storage:
> - Ceph Monitor (ceph-mon)
> - Ceph Manager (ceph-mgr)
> - Ceph OSD (ceph-osd; Object Storage Daemon)
>
> -TIP: We highly recommend to get familiar with Ceph's architecture
> +TIP: We highly recommend to get familiar with Ceph
> +footnote:[Ceph intro https://docs.ceph.com/docs/{ceph_codename}/start/intro/],
> +its architecture
> footnote:[Ceph architecture https://docs.ceph.com/docs/{ceph_codename}/architecture/]
> and vocabulary
> footnote:[Ceph glossary https://docs.ceph.com/docs/{ceph_codename}/glossary].
> --
> 2.27.0
May one of the maintainers please review my patches? Thanks.