From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53FE41FF170 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2024 10:00:50 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 31E5B2EA59; Tue, 3 Dec 2024 10:00:54 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <688625f9-631f-4f46-9a40-cc50392b27a5@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 10:00:21 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Thomas Lamprecht , Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20241202133256.207174-1-l.wagner@proxmox.com> <56841fc4-5486-4d5e-b254-6d65dd342ce9@proxmox.com> Content-Language: de-AT, en-US From: Lukas Wagner In-Reply-To: <56841fc4-5486-4d5e-b254-6d65dd342ce9@proxmox.com> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.009 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 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH proxmox] notify: remove legacy filters and groups X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" On 2024-12-02 16:29, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > Am 02.12.24 um 14:32 schrieb Lukas Wagner: >> It has been a full year now, so I'd argue it is safe to drop these >> safety guards now. On the off chance that there are still systems out >> there which still have these entries in their notifications.cfg, >> a manual removal from the file will be needed after this commit. > > It be safer to argue versions not time here, as users simply can not upgrade > a system for over a year and then run into such things, if the boundary is a > major version OTOH they cannot run into this by just upgrading, and we could > add a safety check to the future pve8to9 upgrade checker script. Yes, you are right about versions being the more important factor. Since this is a just a bit of cleanup in proxmox-notify, I see no problem with postponing this until PVE 9 and then adding it as a check to the pve8to9 script. There really is no rush for this and this seems to be less work than adding a check to d/postinst. Thanks for your input! > > But, it indeed seems a bit unlikely to trigger frequently in practice, so as > middleground we could add a simple detection heuristic to d/postinst and if > an old-style notification is detected print a big notice about how one can > fix this manually or try to rename the config file to notifications.cfg.old > or the like, as we basically can never have the legacy and new stuff mixed > IIRC. -- - Lukas _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel