From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED40A1FF0AD for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2026 10:00:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A87BA215C4; Fri, 21 Aug 2026 10:00:33 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2026 10:00:28 +0200 Message-Id: From: "Shan Shaji" To: "Azharul Haque" Subject: Re: [PATCH dart-api-client v2 1/2] fix #4281: access: add `type` property to `PveAccessDomainModel` X-Mailer: aerc 0.20.0 References: <20260810144713.75806-1-haque@azharul.com> <20260810144713.75806-2-haque@azharul.com> In-Reply-To: X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1787299202491 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.009 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy ENA_SUBJ_ODD_CASE 1.2 Subject has odd case KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) 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 Message-ID-Hash: G3VTSQZNGRORPOEWGNCGH4HXPLY25AWR X-Message-ID-Hash: G3VTSQZNGRORPOEWGNCGH4HXPLY25AWR X-MailFrom: s.shaji@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: 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: Hi Azharul, On Fri Aug 21, 2026 at 4:56 AM CEST, Azharul Haque wrote: > Hi Shan, > > > I went with PveAccessDomainType to match this repo's existing convention > for this kind of enum (PveNodesDiskListType, PveTaskLogStatusType, etc.). > Happy to switch it to Proxmox... if you'd prefer, just let me know and I'= ll > send a follow-up. PveAccessDomainType should be fine here. Thanks for double checking it. I u= sed the "Proxmox.." prefix because the access domain types are common across pr= oxmox products, also that was an example :).=20 > Also, my earlier reply on this thread got held by the list for moderator > approval since I'm not yet a subscribed member, so if it looked like it > only reached you directly, that's why, not a delivery failure on my end. Ahh, Sorry! Somehow overlooked it. Thanks for letting me know.=20 > > v3 with this and the rest of your feedback is on its way. > > > Best, > > Azharul > > On Thu, Aug 20, 2026 at 10:39=E2=80=AFAM Shan Shaji = wrote: > >> Hi, thank you very much for agreeing to incorporate my feedbacks. >> If possible, please also send future replies to the mailling list as >> well to ensure better visibility. >> >> On Thu Aug 20, 2026 at 3:37 PM CEST, Azharul Haque wrote: >> > Hi Shan, >> > >> > >> > Thanks for testing against Keycloak, glad to hear it worked cleanly en= d >> to >> > end. >> > >> > Good call on the enum. I'll switch PveAccessDomainModel.type to a >> > ProxmoxAccessDomainType EnumClass along the lines you sketched, and >> update >> > isOpenIdRealm to compare against it. I'll fold this into a v3 alongsid= e >> the >> > other feedback (the login-manager patch split, the regex/dedup fix on = the >> > OpenID login helpers, and the pubspec/Flutter version issue you flagge= d) >> > and send it tonight. >> > >> > >> > Thanks again for the quick, thorough review. >> > >> > >> > Best, >> > >> > Azharul >> > >> >>