From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <g.goller@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 8EAE99A1DF
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 12 Oct 2023 14:40:58 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 6AA231371A
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 12 Oct 2023 14:40:28 +0200 (CEST)
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>; Thu, 12 Oct 2023 14:40:27 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0D91447654
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 12 Oct 2023 14:40:27 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <daf647d4-bcc3-4807-bc47-ca5566710a08@proxmox.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2023 14:40:26 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
To: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20230913142045.240835-1-g.goller@proxmox.com>
 <bc2a187c-aa42-4fa8-967f-02b15ac23097@proxmox.com>
 <9912014b-0ad8-4cf8-9ce7-8b46a553b55b@proxmox.com>
 <83b3341d-9b14-4c0d-9265-65fb9d95dcfe@proxmox.com>
From: Gabriel Goller <g.goller@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <83b3341d-9b14-4c0d-9265-65fb9d95dcfe@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL -0.340 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
Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup] fix: ui: spinner position
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: Thu, 12 Oct 2023 12:40:58 -0000

On 10/12/23 14:34, Dominik Csapak wrote:

> [..]
> Depends on your definition of **need**. If we don't do this,
> it would look differently e.g. for the task list in pve/pmg vs pbs
> and we want to have the UI consistent across products
> (except if there is a good reason to diverge) so for me it is
> important to stay consistent here.
>
IIRC we don't have any long rows (meaning tables with single
columns or such) in pve/pmg (at least I have never seen them).
So it won't be a big (or even visible change in pve/pmg). But I
understand your argument of UI (and code) consistency in
between products.