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) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 080196428C
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:50:22 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E9EBBC0A2
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:50:21 +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) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id E222DC095
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:50:20 +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 AA3AA45F8B
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:50:20 +0100 (CET)
To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=c3=bcnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
References: <20201028113632.814586-1-f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <fe1650a2-a44b-419b-272d-d6df435f7a26@proxmox.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:50:20 +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: <20201028113632.814586-1-f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.337 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           -0.921 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] [PATCH proxmox-backup 00/16] API tokens
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: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 19:50:22 -0000

On 28.10.20 12:36, Fabian Gr=C3=BCnbichler wrote:
> changes since RFC:
> - reworked Userid with wrapping Authid
> - rename RpcEnvironment user -> auth_id
> - lots of churn
> - lots of corner cases
> - lots of rebasing
> - ACL editing for unprivileged users
> - more GUI stuff added
>=20
> proxmox and proxmox-widget-toolkit patches needed for patches #3++ and
> GUI respectively
>=20

played a bit around, works nice in general, but please add some documenta=
tion,
else one can have a bit of a hard time figuring the usage out.

Also, I just may not remember if we discussed this, but why is there no
"inherit the user permission" mode like PVE has?