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 E9F801FF146 for ; Tue, 26 May 2026 16:51:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C4DDD4DC6; Tue, 26 May 2026 16:51:39 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 26 May 2026 16:51:06 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta Subject: Re: [PATCH datacenter-manager] ui: configuration: slightly clean up tool tips for subscrion registry To: Shannon Sterz , pdm-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260526143027.482438-1-s.sterz@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <20260526143027.482438-1-s.sterz@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1779807042322 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.005 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: MEFKHZW6B3TXV4XWKZZUQ332NKIOB4LF X-Message-ID-Hash: MEFKHZW6B3TXV4XWKZZUQ332NKIOB4LF X-MailFrom: t.lamprecht@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 X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Datacenter Manager development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Am 26.05.26 um 16:30 schrieb Shannon Sterz: > * properly quote actions Some rationale would be nice, I've seen both in practice and the casing should help. But no hard feelings here, it might be a bit more explicit. > * rephrase some tips slightly for clarity. Only one is really changed FWICT? > > Signed-off-by: Shannon Sterz > --- > ui/src/configuration/subscription_keys.rs | 6 +++--- > ui/src/configuration/subscription_registry.rs | 8 ++++---- > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/ui/src/configuration/subscription_keys.rs b/ui/src/configuration/subscription_keys.rs > index 5f3e9aa..c35a546 100644 > --- a/ui/src/configuration/subscription_keys.rs > +++ b/ui/src/configuration/subscription_keys.rs ) > @@ -325,7 +325,7 @@ impl LoadableComponent for SubscriptionKeyGridComp { > ) > .tip(tr!( > "Propose a one-key-per-node assignment for nodes that have no active \ > - subscription, then queue it pending Apply." > + subscription, then queue applying it." This seems not really making it better IMO, what about: "... then queue it for the next 'Apply Pending'." As then the user gets explicitly told what unblocks the queued action. > )), > ); > }