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))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 214209A11
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  1 Apr 2022 17:55:29 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1389529255
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  1 Apr 2022 17:54:59 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 9C9992924A
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  1 Apr 2022 17:54:58 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5DF1943366
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  1 Apr 2022 17:54:58 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <41a5afce-d792-10c8-4a0f-e597a109caa2@proxmox.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2022 17:54:47 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:99.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/99.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
References: <20220401061413.702998-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220401061413.702998-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.055 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 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
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE    -0.01 -
Subject: [pve-devel] applied: [PATCH manager] fix #3976: api/backup: make
 schedule/starttime truly optional on update
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2022 15:55:29 -0000

On 01.04.22 08:14, Dominik Csapak wrote:
> on create we require either starttime (+dow) or a schedule, but when
> updating an existing job, this is not necessary
> 
> before we changed to schedules, the starttime was not optional either on
> update, but i think there is no reason to require the user to send the
> schedule/startime along every time.
> 
> the gui will send all values every time, so that was never a problem there
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
> ---
>  PVE/API2/Backup.pm | 9 +++++----
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
>

applied, thanks!

albeit the "$required" param name made me ask "required what?", but as the
check fn is "private" and small enough I don't think its a real code smell
issue.