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) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 570CF9BFA1
for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 09:51:52 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 38B6C1057C
for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 09:51:22 +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) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 09:51:21 +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 228A744210
for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 09:51:20 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------cT4fegu06SpFU8oiEMoJoSJR"
Message-ID: <f5bde31e-1fbd-4b82-be21-a8c742781fea@proxmox.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2023 09:51:19 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>,
Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20230901081259.30375-1-g.goller@proxmox.com>
<ef964fed-a762-47de-afda-419789beccf4@proxmox.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Gabriel Goller <g.goller@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <ef964fed-a762-47de-afda-419789beccf4@proxmox.com>
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL -0.312 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
HTML_MESSAGE 0.001 HTML included in message
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] schema: removed excessive newlines
in error messages
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, 23 Oct 2023 07:51:52 -0000
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------cT4fegu06SpFU8oiEMoJoSJR
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
On 10/18/23 19:22, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
> [..]
> The only thing, from top of my head, speaking against doing 1. at all would
> be that it's making parsing a bit harder, but tbh., we never guaranteed
> error message stability, and if one depends on such stuff they should use
> the API – so not seeing that as a blocker.
>
> What do you think?
Yes, sounds good, I'll send a patch right now (+ I don't think parsing is a problem here).
--------------cT4fegu06SpFU8oiEMoJoSJR
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<pre>On 10/18/23 19:22, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:</pre>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:ef964fed-a762-47de-afda-419789beccf4@proxmox.com">
<pre>[..]
</pre>
<span style="white-space: pre-wrap">
</span><span style="white-space: pre-wrap">
</span>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">The only thing, from top of my head, speaking against doing 1. at all would
be that it's making parsing a bit harder, but tbh., we never guaranteed
error message stability, and if one depends on such stuff they should use
the API – so not seeing that as a blocker.
What do you think?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>Yes, sounds good, I'll send a patch right now (+ I don't think parsing is a problem here).</pre>
</body>
</html>
--------------cT4fegu06SpFU8oiEMoJoSJR--