From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 86C2096318 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2023 08:04:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 60E5B2F8C4 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2023 08:04:05 +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) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2023 08:04:03 +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 EBC3045E66 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2023 08:04:02 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <5e25c8e9-606a-7121-7daa-ad06914fe553@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 08:04:02 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/109.0 Content-Language: en-GB To: Lukas Wagner , Proxmox Backup Server development discussion References: <20230117142037.847150-1-l.wagner@proxmox.com> <04161079-db6c-7cae-0689-856cd7b61cb9@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 3.035 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 -1.148 Looks like a legit reply (A) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI -5 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, high trust 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-ldap 0/6] introduce proxmox-ldap crate X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 07:04:35 -0000 Am 23/01/2023 um 15:50 schrieb Lukas Wagner: > Thanks for the review. > > On 1/23/23 12:27, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: >> Can you please sent a v3 that bases is on that repo and has Wolfgang's minor >> comments addressed? > > Sure! > Since this series was a spin-off from my original LDAP series which *also* affected the `proxmox` repo > in v2 as well: Should I merge both series for a common v3? Or should I keep them separate > to keep the patch series a bit smaller/more manageable? What would you prefer? > Separate is fine, as the crates in proxmox are all stand alone. IMO the series separation was a good call, and merging the two series due to them touching (partially) the same repos is not the best criteria, at least on its own.