From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEEA81FF13B for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2026 12:40:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1233515AA3; Wed, 25 Mar 2026 12:40:58 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2026 12:40:52 +0100 Message-Id: From: "Christoph Heiss" To: "Thomas Lamprecht" Subject: Re: [PATCH proxmox v2 1/8] serde: implement ini serializer Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: aerc 0.21.0 References: <20260213143601.1424613-1-c.heiss@proxmox.com> <20260213143601.1424613-2-c.heiss@proxmox.com> <867329b9-bebe-4c6d-8d0e-3f33e220c235@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <867329b9-bebe-4c6d-8d0e-3f33e220c235@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1774438805292 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.054 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy 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 Message-ID-Hash: T7LKXYPTJCASXKJYLEYBHSAUEUBOED73 X-Message-ID-Hash: T7LKXYPTJCASXKJYLEYBHSAUEUBOED73 X-MailFrom: c.heiss@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: Wolfgang Bumiller , pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Tue Mar 24, 2026 at 12:13 PM CET, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > Am 13.02.26 um 15:36 schrieb Christoph Heiss: >> The official WireGuard tooling wg(8) uses a (mostly) INI-like format >> for consuming configuration. >> >> E.g. `wg syncconf` will be used by in the future by the WireGuard fabric >> for applying changes to a particular WireGuard interface. >> >> One of the quirks of the INI format used by wg(8) are that there can be >> multiple sections with the same name, which is also explicitly supported >> by this serializer. > > Any technical reason for this to be in proxmox-serde over a dedicated > crate? like proxmox-ini or proxmox-ini-config or the like? Not really. Didn't know if we wanted a dedicated crate for this and - as you say below - proxmox-serde is mixed bag of serde-related stuff and it kind of fitted, so just decided to put it there for now. Will move it to a separate crate for v3. > > proxmox-serde is currently a bit of a mixed bag, but might be better > for more for generic serde helper that should be mostly provived by > upstream in some ideal world (from our POV). > > @Wolfgang: any opinion here.