From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <d.csapak@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 7F09B710E0
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  8 Jun 2022 10:23:14 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 76834597A
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  8 Jun 2022 10:23:14 +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 id 1540A5967
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  8 Jun 2022 10:23:11 +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 E162142F0E;
 Wed,  8 Jun 2022 10:23:10 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <1f19ee6f-d0d6-7be0-2897-bb03f5fcb814@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2022 10:23:10 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.0
To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20220602121811.3472729-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
 <20220602121811.3472729-7-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
 <63d9661d-7f16-596b-a4b6-118aea2c7f89@proxmox.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <63d9661d-7f16-596b-a4b6-118aea2c7f89@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.971 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           -1.732 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
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE    -0.01 -
Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup v7 6/8] api: add metricserver
 endpoints
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: Wed, 08 Jun 2022 08:23:14 -0000

On 6/7/22 14:44, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
> Am 02/06/2022 um 14:18 schrieb Dominik Csapak:
>> but in contrast to pve, we split the api by type of the section config,
>> since we cannot handle multiple types in the updater
>>
> 
> higher level comment:
> 
> I'd guess that it comes partially from how we named the perl module in PVE, but
> I'd still drop the "server" part from file/directory names and thus module/api
> path ones, IMO it doesn't really add much but extra length/noise (PVE's api also
> uses only "metrics")
> 

makes sense, in pve, we do '.../metrics/server' for the api though, should i do that?
or keep it just '.../metrics' ?