From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 8DE547E676 for ; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 18:18:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7F402208BA for ; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 18:18:02 +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 id 65FBF208AA for ; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 18:18:01 +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 34D5244B71 for ; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 18:18:01 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <8d4c64d8-8e22-e1fb-e84e-7bd6321c9c41@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2021 18:18:00 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:95.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/95.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Dominik Csapak References: <20211110140256.1863209-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <20211110140256.1863209-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.725 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 KAM_NUMSUBJECT 0.5 Subject ends in numbers excluding current years NICE_REPLY_A -1.678 Looks like a legit reply (A) 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 manager 0/4] followups for vzdump scheduling2 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2021 17:18:02 -0000 On 10.11.21 15:02, Dominik Csapak wrote: > * fixes the saving/loading of the 'prune-backups' field (oops) > * adds correct validation for id > * adds a comment field for jobs still missing any documentation update ;) I'd move out the schedule format section from the replication chapter to an appendix (or some other, more central place), extend backups about the new scheduling stuff. also the ID is now some in-between stuff, one needs to enter it but it won't be shown in the grid anyway, so either: 1 go the full way like PBS sync/verify/... jobs and just auto-generate, less inputs or the user is normally better UX and they can express comments already in the, well new comment field. 2 hide it only for the old ones, rather too confusing 3 allow to edit it for existing jobs, would be a bit weird for the API but as we have the digest mechanism and can do (pseudo call) `PUT /.../backup/?id=` it could work without to much confusion.. 1 would be the least commitment now, 2 is meh and 3 is more commitment now and may open a precedent for users to nag about allowing this in more places (where it may be way harder, a nuisance or plain impossible) What do you think?