From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <c.ebner@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 5C41897857
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 11:38:07 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 44D511B8A
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 11:38:07 +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>; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 11:38:06 +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 850A041E2F
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 11:38:06 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <c407348e-66ba-4cec-956f-c554b54c5546@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 11:38:04 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: Hannes Laimer <h.laimer@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20240416152416.96561-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com>
 <20240416152416.96561-10-h.laimer@proxmox.com>
 <ba1e1f16-9b3c-4952-92a1-aa37c9de40fc@proxmox.com>
 <D0MA2OPK3TWK.39IYYBBD5T7NI@proxmox.com>
Content-Language: en-US, de-DE
From: Christian Ebner <c.ebner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <D0MA2OPK3TWK.39IYYBBD5T7NI@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.031 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
 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 v4 09/22] pbs-api-types:
 datastore: use new proxmox_schema::de for deserialization
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, 17 Apr 2024 09:38:07 -0000

On 4/17/24 11:08, Hannes Laimer wrote:
> On Wed Apr 17, 2024 at 10:13 AM CEST, Christian Ebner wrote:
>> Still not to happy about the commit title, but no hurt feelings
> 
> actually we don't even need this anymore for this series, but yes,
> missed it, no reason for not changing the message

but it does not hurt either, and is more readable than the previous 
deserialization.

Now that I had another look at this, you might bring the 
`SchemaDeserializer` in scope with a `use` statement at the top so you 
don't need it below, that might help to make this even more readable.