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 09C2691951
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 14 Nov 2022 15:01:35 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D90C5244B1
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 14 Nov 2022 15:01:34 +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 <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 14 Nov 2022 15:01:34 +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 2249B43CC9;
 Mon, 14 Nov 2022 15:01:34 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <a2bce5f2-8b1b-c409-407b-1c63dc82e41f@proxmox.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2022 15:01:33 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:107.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/107.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>,
 Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
References: <20221114094258.35795-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <4ec96660-fe71-85d4-0a04-f3ea9de5f945@proxmox.com>
 <1668432340.zxcajjjalx.astroid@yuna.none>
From: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <1668432340.zxcajjjalx.astroid@yuna.none>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: =?UTF-8?Q?0=0A=09?=AWL 0.066 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: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup] ui: prune job edit: fix
 disabling jobs
X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
 <pbs-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pbs-devel>, 
 <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pbs-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel>, 
 <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2022 14:01:35 -0000

On 11/14/22 14:26, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> On November 14, 2022 11:54 am, Dominik Csapak wrote:
>> IMO good, but do we really drop unrecognized parameters in the api?
>> is that intentional? (iow. in pve it would have triggered an api exception
>> since that parameter does not exist)
> 
> yes, if it's an AllOf Schema (which everything containing a flattened type is).
> for regular ObjectSchema-s, AdditionalProperties like in PVE is configurable.
> 

meh... for configuration APIs i quite like the PVE behavior, since we can catch
such things much earlier.