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 B2D4B8AD56
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 17:31:39 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8C6F323E2D
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 17:31:09 +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>; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 17:31:08 +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 80B3044B09
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 17:31:08 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <1f2a4db3-1042-0d1f-c23b-6b03fbabd44b@proxmox.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2022 17:31:07 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:106.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/106.0
Content-Language: en-GB
To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
 <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Stefan Hanreich <s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
References: <20221020133630.376542-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20221020133630.376542-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL -0.034 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
 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See
 http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more
 information. [proxmox.com, proxmox-backup-manager.rs]
Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup v2] fix #4301: correctly pass
 rate limit parameters to API
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: Fri, 21 Oct 2022 15:31:39 -0000

FYI, missing a (short) changelog to the previous patch reviosion, namely...

Am 20/10/2022 um 15:36 schrieb Stefan Hanreich:
> With the old code the rate limit parameters got passed in their own
> dictionary under the limit key, but the API expects the rate-limit
> settings as top-level keys. This commit correctly sets the rate-limit
> parameters so the API actually uses them.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Hanreich <s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
> ---

.. here

https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Developer_Documentation#Versioned_Patches

>  src/bin/proxmox-backup-manager.rs | 13 +++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/src/bin/proxmox-backup-manager.rs b/src/bin/proxmox-backup-manager.rs