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)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 342B0690B9 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 10:29:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 29169C9CB for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 10:29:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [212.186.127.180]) (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 id B4F62C9C1 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 10:29:50 +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 7C95642117 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 10:29:50 +0100 (CET) To: Mira Limbeck , Proxmox Backup Server development discussion References: <20201110132218.17717-1-m.limbeck@proxmox.com> <20201110132218.17717-2-m.limbeck@proxmox.com> <36cbccc4-340b-933b-63d7-921bc332a25b@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht Message-ID: <72ee447c-6b14-044c-3e6d-e779ca2d90ba@proxmox.com> Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 10:29:49 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:83.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/83.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.096 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address 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) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium 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] applied: [PATCH v2 proxmox-backup 2/2] add versions command to proxmox-backup-manager 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: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 09:29:51 -0000 FYI: Including the mailing list again in CC. On 12.11.20 10:11, Mira Limbeck wrote: > So we print proxmox-backup with the kernel version instead of proxmox-b= ackup-server in the non-verbose case? no, the slice should be selecting the second package, fixed. >=20 > This is at least different from pveversion as that prints pve-manager a= nd not proxmox-ve. >=20 > And with this change the output-format also changes the amount of infor= mation (json and json-pretty -> full output, text (default) -> only a sub= set) yes, that's intended and what an user interface, be it CLI or web, is for= =2E Just dumping the whole state does not makes sense here for the user, same= as the web interface shouldn't just dump the raw state it gets from an API response, different presentation require selecting different data sho= wn to point at the thing one actually want to present to the user. If we just could always dump the whole state we could just auto generate the whole user interfaces, but those tend to be pretty confusing and unus= able for most.