From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <f.gruenbichler@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 CAD2491932
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 14 Nov 2022 14:34:16 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id ACF1423E42
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 14 Nov 2022 14:34:16 +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 14:34:16 +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 D97A243A16
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 14 Nov 2022 14:27:04 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2022 14:26:58 +0100
From: Fabian =?iso-8859-1?q?Gr=FCnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
To: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20221114094258.35795-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <4ec96660-fe71-85d4-0a04-f3ea9de5f945@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <4ec96660-fe71-85d4-0a04-f3ea9de5f945@proxmox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: astroid/0.16.0 (https://github.com/astroidmail/astroid)
Message-Id: <1668432340.zxcajjjalx.astroid@yuna.none>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: =?UTF-8?Q?0=0A=09?=AWL 0.140 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?=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 13:34:16 -0000

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 exceptio=
n
> 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 configurabl=
e.