From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D71A1FF09B for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2026 15:28:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A7F5B2132D; Mon, 31 Aug 2026 15:28:38 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2026 15:28:34 +0200 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [PATCH datacenter-manager/yew-widget-toolkit 0/3] ui: persist the main menus expanded state From: "Lukas Wagner" To: "Dominik Csapak" , "Lukas Wagner" , X-Mailer: aerc 0.21.0-0-g5549850facc2-dirty References: <20260820081803.991511-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> <19931a6b-a366-48f2-a48c-119d4380fb92@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <19931a6b-a366-48f2-a48c-119d4380fb92@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1788182901437 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.551 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: QH4UMTNSGH6XVPEMO7VPFZGDPWVTDQBW X-Message-ID-Hash: QH4UMTNSGH6XVPEMO7VPFZGDPWVTDQBW 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 31, 2026 at 3:11 PM CEST, Dominik Csapak wrote: >>=20 >> LGTM in general, works fine and the code seems good too. >>=20 >> One thought, looking at the saved state in the web inspector in Firefox: >> Would it maybe make sense for future extensions to slightly update the >> serialized format from >>=20 >> ["sdn","administration"] >>=20 >> to something like: >>=20 >> { collapsed: ["sdn", "administration"]} >>=20 >> That would make it much easier to add other keys as well in the future, >> if we need to store additional state. > > it's actually not collapsed, but changed from the default > (the main menu in pdm just happens to default to all expanded) > > so it would be { "changed": [...] } > > would that be ok? Maybe "changed-collapsed" so that it conveys that this is about the collpase/expanded state and not anything else? > > we could of course do this in the future and interpret > an array as just the changed list and migrate automatically. > > in practice this would look like (rough pseude code): > > let try1: Result =3D input.parse(); > match try1 { > Ok(state) =3D> { /* return the state */ } > Err(err) =3D> { > let legacy: Result =3D input.parse(); > // either take legacy and convert to new state > // or return original error 'err' > } > } Yeah, migrating the format is of course also possible in the future, but since this is completely new code, I'd favor making it extensible right away. Thanks!