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 D84BD74AAE
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 11:57:08 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C600D251D4
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 11:56:38 +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 id 5EE86251C6
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 11:56:38 +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 2C45C4302A
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 11:56:38 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <df29023e-a352-bf67-8dda-4434ae31e33a@proxmox.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 11:56:28 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:90.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/90.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
 <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Hannes Laimer <h.laimer@proxmox.com>
References: <20210622075620.28681-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com>
 <20210622075620.28681-2-h.laimer@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210622075620.28681-2-h.laimer@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.700 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
Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH v2 proxmox-backup 1/3] close #3459:
 verify-job: move snapshot filter into function
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: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 09:57:08 -0000

On 22.06.21 09:56, Hannes Laimer wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Hannes Laimer <h.laimer@proxmox.com>
> ---

just a general observation: this alone does not closes #3459, so not quite correct
to have that in the commit messages' subject.
Preparatory commits, should rather note so in the commit messages' body,
"preparatory for a fix for #3459"

For partial fixes, i.e., where the patch is part of the actual fix but not enough
on its own, its common to use "partially closes #XYZ"