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 E322D1FF146 for ; Tue, 26 May 2026 16:53:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 59D7C5138; Tue, 26 May 2026 16:53:32 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Tue, 26 May 2026 16:53:28 +0200 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [PATCH datacenter-manager] ui: configuration: slightly clean up tool tips for subscrion registry To: "Thomas Lamprecht" , X-Mailer: aerc 0.20.0 References: <20260526143027.482438-1-s.sterz@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: From: "Shannon Sterz" X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1779807184213 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.111 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: 6GECKWK7RJ6QBMJ7TGZEWTQQAVP5EVUU X-Message-ID-Hash: 6GECKWK7RJ6QBMJ7TGZEWTQQAVP5EVUU X-MailFrom: s.sterz@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 Tue May 26, 2026 at 4:51 PM CEST, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > Am 26.05.26 um 16:30 schrieb Shannon Sterz: >> * properly quote actions > Some rationale would be nice, I've seen both in practice and the casing > should help. But no hard feelings here, it might be a bit more explicit. > >> * rephrase some tips slightly for clarity. > Only one is really changed FWICT? > >> >> Signed-off-by: Shannon Sterz >> --- >> ui/src/configuration/subscription_keys.rs | 6 +++--- >> ui/src/configuration/subscription_registry.rs | 8 ++++---- >> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/ui/src/configuration/subscription_keys.rs b/ui/src/configur= ation/subscription_keys.rs >> index 5f3e9aa..c35a546 100644 >> --- a/ui/src/configuration/subscription_keys.rs >> +++ b/ui/src/configuration/subscription_keys.rs > ) >> @@ -325,7 +325,7 @@ impl LoadableComponent for SubscriptionKeyGridComp { >> ) >> .tip(tr!( >> "Propose a one-key-per-node assignment for nodes th= at have no active \ >> - subscription, then queue it pending Apply." >> + subscription, then queue applying it." > This seems not really making it better IMO, what about: > > "... then queue it for the next 'Apply Pending'." > > As then the user gets explicitly told what unblocks the queued action. Hmm sure, sorry i missed that before sending a v2, will send a v3. > >> )), >> ); >> }