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 434C41FF0AE for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2026 17:34:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 62AC6215EA; Tue, 15 Sep 2026 17:34:43 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <66f9b8ad-b262-4a3a-9ec8-3179ef3a5437@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2026 17:34:37 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta Subject: Re: [PATCH manager 1/1] cephx: rename 'consumer' to 'client' in output and comments To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com, =?UTF-8?Q?Michael_K=C3=B6ppl?= References: <20260915145047.754765-1-m.koeppl@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Jonas Theisen In-Reply-To: <20260915145047.754765-1-m.koeppl@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1789486463867 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.290 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: T6EVSA6J65WLZGV3TXSFGBB5BXVDXASU X-Message-ID-Hash: T6EVSA6J65WLZGV3TXSFGBB5BXVDXASU X-MailFrom: j.theisen@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 VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 9/15/26 16:50, Michael Köppl wrote: > 'Client' is the term more often used in the Proxmox VE documentation and > 'consumer' has been replaced by 'client' in the Ceph documentation to > avoid confusion [0]. `pveceph auth status` and the cephx health hints in > the GUI still used the old 'consumer'. Update output strings and > comments accordingly. This change is made to conform to the updated > documentation and the naming change in the cephx migration script. > > [0] https://docs.ceph.com/en/latest/dev/cephx/ > > Signed-off-by: Michael Köppl > --- > Sent as a separate patch but meant as a follow-up to [1]. > > [1] https://lore.proxmox.com/pve-devel/20260915131651.515520-1-m.koeppl@proxmox.com > > Looks good to me. Nearly all the remaining occurrences of 'consumer' are in variable or function names. There are still two 'consumers' in Services.pm line 938 and 1019 but since these are code comments i don't see that as a blocker. Consider this: Reviewed-by: Jonas Theisen