From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@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 11186800EC
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 14:11:55 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0923617349
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 14:11:25 +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 id 3F89C17339
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 14:11:23 +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 19BED40A51
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 14:11:23 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <5bfbffc1-0774-db3d-8e0d-d4f3f7411bae@proxmox.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 14:11:22 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:95.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/95.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
References: <20211116112036.3423536-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20211116112036.3423536-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.113 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 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 Alignment
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: [pve-devel] applied: [RFC PATCH manager] ui: render 'protected'
 column as icon and enable sorting
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: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 13:11:55 -0000

On 16.11.21 12:20, Dominik Csapak wrote:
> instead of 'Yes' and 'No', render the same icon as in pbs for protected
> backups, and leave the column empty otherwise
> 
> this makes the difference much more visible and is more consistent with
> how we present that flag in pbs
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
> ---
> i initially wanted to add it to the text, but that seemed a bit weird.
> i'd let people convince me though, if there is a strong argument..
> 

crowding the interface has some real cost, especially for new users, while
iconfying everything is surely also not ideal for UX I think it's OK here.

>  www/manager6/grid/BackupView.js     | 3 ++-
>  www/manager6/storage/ContentView.js | 3 ++-
>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
>

applied, thanks!