From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@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 73EC191877
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  8 Feb 2023 15:21:27 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5347E18DC6
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  8 Feb 2023 15:21:27 +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>; Wed,  8 Feb 2023 15:21:26 +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 01CB345FE5
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  8 Feb 2023 15:21:26 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <916e860d-43f9-db19-c4a2-98870a9c95f9@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2023 15:21:25 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:110.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/110.0
Content-Language: de-AT, en-GB
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Max Carrara <m.carrara@proxmox.com>
References: <20230207153422.130676-1-m.carrara@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230207153422.130676-1-m.carrara@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.522 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
 NICE_REPLY_A           -1.146 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] fix #4335: report: add
 datacenter.cfg to output
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: Wed, 08 Feb 2023 14:21:27 -0000

Am 07/02/2023 um 16:34 schrieb Max Carrara:
> Simply includes the contents of /etc/pve/datacenter.cfg
> in the general system info section.

Looks ok, albeit it could be slightly more fitting in the cluster section, but
no hard feelings from my side - maybe get the opinion of devs currently manning
the enterprise support team if it fits general and is often relevant so should be
near the top, or if it might crowd other info more there and cluster would be
a better fit after all.