From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A52E31FF173 for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2024 13:45:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C987912A1B; Mon, 25 Nov 2024 13:45:32 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <75ba25f9-c671-4899-9b9a-6b3fb08fecaa@proxmox.com> Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 13:44:58 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion , Hannes Laimer References: <20241122144713.299130-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com> <20241122144713.299130-15-h.laimer@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Dominik Csapak In-Reply-To: <20241122144713.299130-15-h.laimer@proxmox.com> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.016 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. 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-backup v14 14/26] ui: add removable datastore creation support 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: , Reply-To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: pbs-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pbs-devel" comments inline: On 11/22/24 15:47, Hannes Laimer wrote: > Signed-off-by: Hannes Laimer > --- > www/window/DataStoreEdit.js | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/www/window/DataStoreEdit.js b/www/window/DataStoreEdit.js > index b8e866df2..7b6aff1e7 100644 > --- a/www/window/DataStoreEdit.js > +++ b/www/window/DataStoreEdit.js > @@ -63,6 +63,20 @@ Ext.define('PBS.DataStoreEdit', { > emptyText: gettext('An absolute path'), > validator: val => val?.trim() !== '/', > }, > + { > + xtype: 'pmxDisplayEditField', > + fieldLabel: gettext('Device'), > + name: 'backing-device', > + disabled: true, > + cbind: { > + editable: '{isCreate}', > + }, > + editConfig: { > + xtype: 'pbsPartitionSelector', > + allowBlank: true, > + }, > + emptyText: gettext('Device path'), > + }, it's a bit tricky to see from the code, but this editwindow is never actually called in an editable context, so the displayedit field here would actually not be necessary, because if you omit this > ], > column2: [ > { > @@ -88,6 +102,29 @@ Ext.define('PBS.DataStoreEdit', { > }, > ], > columnB: [ > + { > + xtype: 'checkbox', > + boxLabel: gettext('Removable datastore'), > + submitValue: false, > + listeners: { > + change: function(checkbox, isRemovable) { > + let inputPanel = checkbox.up('inputpanel'); > + let pathField = inputPanel.down('[name=path]'); > + let uuidField = inputPanel.down('pbsPartitionSelector[name=backing-device]'); > + let uuidEditField = inputPanel.down('[name=backing-device]'); this 'double' field modifying would also not be necessary. even if we leave the displayedit field, this code here does not make much sense, since the checkbox is always visible/editable, but the device itself is not? either this is editable on an existing datastore (then the device should also be editable afterwards), or this is not changeable, then the checkbox must also vanish on edit in any case, the checkbox change can/should only happen when the device is editable so we can omit trying to modifying the display field here? > + > + uuidField.allowBlank = !isRemovable; > + uuidEditField.setDisabled(!isRemovable); > + uuidField.setDisabled(!isRemovable); > + uuidField.setValue(''); > + if (isRemovable) { > + pathField.setFieldLabel(gettext('On device path')); > + } else { > + pathField.setFieldLabel(gettext('Backing Path')); > + } > + }, > + }, > + }, > { > xtype: 'textfield', > name: 'comment', _______________________________________________ pbs-devel mailing list pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel