From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4932C1FF15C for ; Fri, 22 Aug 2025 11:36:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 856C9CAE3; Fri, 22 Aug 2025 11:36:26 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <72be016f-3aac-4df4-92be-f9793c21a630@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2025 11:35:52 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta To: Dominik Csapak , Proxmox VE development discussion , Shan Shaji References: <20250801100051.83035-1-s.shaji@proxmox.com> Content-Language: de-DE, en-US From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1755855351689 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.029 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_login_manager/pve_flutter_frontend 0/2] refactor: ui: add new settings page in `pve_flutter_frontend` 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 13/08/2025 15:56, Dominik Csapak wrote: > changes look good to me > > something I noticed (that's not your fault at all) which irks me a bit > is that we don't really have any dependency management between > > proxmox_login_manager and pve_flutter_frontend > > as in, we don't ever bump the version of proxmox_login_manager > (and the dart_api_client of course) > > while most of the time it's not a problem i guess (as long > as the current master still builds), when we at one point > want to go back in time (e.g. for bisecting) we don't know anymore > which state the other repositories were (and have to guess) > > Would it make sense to you to start using proper versioning for the > lower level repositories/packages? or is it possible > to track git revisions at least in the pubspec.yaml? > (that way we would just have to update the git revision > in pve_flutter_frontend) alternative would be using proxmox_login_manager through a git submodule, which is not _that_ great for developer experience though... > if we now update the flutter app more regularly and with more > people, it may make sense to do this properly > > I noticed now, because this is technically a breaking change between > the packages, and just applying one patch would break the other > > what do you say? > @Thomas, do you have an opinion here? Explicit versioning and optionally a CHANGELOG (as per Shan's follow-up reply) sound good to me, as it's not directly user facing I'd keep the changelog rather short/low-overhead in any way. _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel