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 EEC6C1FF141 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2026 14:20:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5E3E13A59; Fri, 13 Feb 2026 14:21:27 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2026 14:20:53 +0100 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [PATCH datacenter-manager v3 3/6] pdm-client: accept `delete-token` argument for deleting api token From: "Lukas Wagner" To: "Shan Shaji" , Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: aerc 0.21.0-0-g5549850facc2-dirty References: <20260211152016.445817-1-s.shaji@proxmox.com> <20260211152016.445817-4-s.shaji@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20260211152016.445817-4-s.shaji@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1770988850549 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.037 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 Message-ID-Hash: OKLBOU5SW6BUVMRDA557HCIRQPB4NKU6 X-Message-ID-Hash: OKLBOU5SW6BUVMRDA557HCIRQPB4NKU6 X-MailFrom: l.wagner@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Datacenter Manager development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Wed Feb 11, 2026 at 4:20 PM CET, Shan Shaji wrote: > Signed-off-by: Shan Shaji > --- > > changes since v2: No changes.=20 > changes since v1: > - reformated using `rustfmt`. > - added doc comment. > > lib/pdm-client/src/lib.rs | 11 +++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/pdm-client/src/lib.rs b/lib/pdm-client/src/lib.rs > index 01ee6f7..ef534cc 100644 > --- a/lib/pdm-client/src/lib.rs > +++ b/lib/pdm-client/src/lib.rs > @@ -136,8 +136,15 @@ impl PdmClient { > Ok(()) > } > =20 > - pub async fn delete_remote(&self, remote: &str) -> Result<(), Error>= { > - let path =3D format!("/api2/extjs/remotes/remote/{remote}"); > + /// Deletes a remote, with optional support to also delete the assoc= iated token. > + pub async fn delete_remote( > + &self, > + remote: &str, > + delete_token: &Option, This can just be `Option`. In general, passing &Option is often a bit of an antipattern, instead it's more idiomatic to pass Option<&T>. If the caller has a &Option, they can always call Option::as_ref to get Option<&T> [1]. In this concrete case here, since `bool` is Copy [2], its best to just use Option. [1] https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/option/enum.Option.html#method.as_ref [2] https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/marker/trait.Copy.html > + ) -> Result<(), Error> { > + let path =3D ApiPathBuilder::new(format!("/api2/extjs/remotes/re= mote/{remote}")) > + .maybe_arg("delete-token", delete_token) > + .build(); > self.0.delete(&path).await?.nodata()?; > Ok(()) > }