From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <f.ebner@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 197C191C8E
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 16 Feb 2024 09:29:05 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id ED7B61DA8F
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 16 Feb 2024 09:29:04 +0100 (CET)
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
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 16 Feb 2024 09:29:04 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1A9ED48536
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 16 Feb 2024 09:29:04 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <85222ee0-d673-492f-8255-5a35dc071659@proxmox.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 09:29:02 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
To: Dietmar Maurer <dietmar@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20240215125930.332593-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <1493288684.2675.1708021251418@webmail.proxmox.com>
From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <1493288684.2675.1708021251418@webmail.proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL -0.072 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
 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 -
 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See
 http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more
 information. [wikipedia.org]
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH manager] ui: node: system: avoid using
 'Syslog'
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, 16 Feb 2024 08:29:05 -0000

Am 15.02.24 um 19:20 schrieb Dietmar Maurer:
>> The information gathered by the API call comes from the systemd
>> journal. While 'Syslog' could be interpreted as a shorthand for
>> "System Log", it's better to be explicit to avoid any confusion.
> 
>> -		title: 'Syslog',
>> +		title: gettext('System Log'),
> 
> From Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syslog
> 
>> In computing, syslog /ˈsɪslɒɡ/ is a standard for message logging.
> 

As discussed off-list with Dietmar, the argument is that the messages
are exactly those that are recorded via the syslog standard/mechanism.
So "Syslog" is more precise in that sense, because "System Log" doesn't
capture that fact and I'm retracting my patch.