From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@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 D84BD74AAE for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 11:57:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C600D251D4 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 11:56:38 +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 id 5EE86251C6 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 11:56:38 +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 2C45C4302A for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 11:56:38 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <df29023e-a352-bf67-8dda-4434ae31e33a@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 11:56:28 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:90.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/90.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Hannes Laimer <h.laimer@proxmox.com> References: <20210622075620.28681-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com> <20210622075620.28681-2-h.laimer@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20210622075620.28681-2-h.laimer@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.700 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address 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 Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A) 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 v2 proxmox-backup 1/3] close #3459: verify-job: move snapshot filter into function 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: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 09:57:08 -0000 On 22.06.21 09:56, Hannes Laimer wrote: > Signed-off-by: Hannes Laimer <h.laimer@proxmox.com> > --- just a general observation: this alone does not closes #3459, so not quite correct to have that in the commit messages' subject. Preparatory commits, should rather note so in the commit messages' body, "preparatory for a fix for #3459" For partial fixes, i.e., where the patch is part of the actual fix but not enough on its own, its common to use "partially closes #XYZ"