From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a0f:8001:1:32::40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 531051FF0B2 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2026 15:17:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1DC43215A6; Mon, 24 Aug 2026 15:17:58 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2026 15:17:54 +0200 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [PATCH proxmox v2 03/20] api-macro: support shared state extraction type From: "Lukas Wagner" To: "Dominik Csapak" , "Lukas Wagner" , X-Mailer: aerc 0.21.0-0-g5549850facc2-dirty References: <20260820145220.418032-1-l.wagner@proxmox.com> <20260820145220.418032-4-l.wagner@proxmox.com> <31c21925-e3c4-48b0-b41b-98ef2f991007@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <31c21925-e3c4-48b0-b41b-98ef2f991007@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1787577444965 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.648 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) 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 Message-ID-Hash: EHPGWADFASJS6RIPLZV2GYVFNBOITBYI X-Message-ID-Hash: EHPGWADFASJS6RIPLZV2GYVFNBOITBYI 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 Mon Aug 24, 2026 at 2:33 PM CEST, Dominik Csapak wrote: > just a nit, but IIUC this method parses all parameters out that have a=20 > State type? > > > e.g i couldn't use a myfoo::bar::State parameter anymore? > > not that i think this is super critical, but maybe some kind > of namespace in the type would be nice? > > e.g. PmxAppState ? > > this is a bit longer, but much less chance to collide with other things..= . Maybe using an attribute, as suggested by Robert [1] would solve this elegantly -- i'll need to try this out. I'm not sure if we have any generic API parameters right now; we could probably get by as is, but completely eliminating the potential for collision would of course be preferable. Thanks! [1] https://lore.proxmox.com/pdm-devel/20260817125727.454039-1-l.wagner@pro= xmox.com/T/#maf04e30430aaed5c94933897cf52a67b80d0250e