From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CFF61FF15E
for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Tue, 25 Mar 2025 12:19:54 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1730979EB;
Tue, 25 Mar 2025 12:19:48 +0100 (CET)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 12:19:14 +0100
Message-Id: <D8PB1CNMOWVY.2OIIX68JVO342@proxmox.com>
From: "Alexander Zeidler" <a.zeidler@proxmox.com>
To: "Aaron Lauterer" <a.lauterer@proxmox.com>, "Proxmox VE development
discussion" <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20250210103644.3-1-a.zeidler@proxmox.com>
<b7703f81-8418-4cd7-802e-9852b5b1b8bf@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <b7703f81-8418-4cd7-802e-9852b5b1b8bf@proxmox.com>
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL 0.085 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 docs v1] package repos: revise Ceph section,
introduce 2 attributes
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>
Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com
Sender: "pve-devel" <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
On Mon Mar 24, 2025 at 5:50 PM CET, Aaron Lauterer wrote:
>
>
> On 2025-02-10 11:36, Alexander Zeidler wrote:
>> * Remove duplicated text to maintain clarity
>> * Mention available installation methods (web-based wizard, CLI tool)
>> * Create a table to see the support state of Ceph releases
>
> I am not sure if having this in the rather static documentation is a
> good idea. Having it in the Proxmox VE wiki where changes can be made
> quickly is probably better. Similar how we handle it for PVE releases
> with https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/FAQ
https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/FAQ is not meant for manual modification.
It is auto-generated from pve-faq.adoc and also included in the doc:
https://pve.proxmox.com/pve-docs/pve-admin-guide.html#faq-support-table
I am not sure if quick edits are needed here. While the estimated EOL
should not change, the other table content and admin guide version
may/should be updated anyway with new PVE/Ceph releases.
>
>> * List and link to the EOL dates of Ceph releases
>> * Reword the descriptions of available PVE repositories
>>
>> * Add two new attributes to avoid manual editing multiple lines
>> ** debian-codename=bookworm
>> It seems that the codename is not available in the build process,
>> so updating the new attribute on Debian major release upgrades may
>> be fine.
>> ** pve-version=8
>> While `revnumber` ("8.3.1") is made available by the current build
>> process, it is not as suitable as only mentioning the major version
>> number.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Zeidler <a.zeidler@proxmox.com>
>> ---
>> asciidoc/asciidoc-pve.conf | 2 +
>> pve-package-repos.adoc | 165 ++++++++++++++-----------------------
>> 2 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 104 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/asciidoc/asciidoc-pve.conf b/asciidoc/asciidoc-pve.conf
>> index 0c28298..8ad635f 100644
>> --- a/asciidoc/asciidoc-pve.conf
>> +++ b/asciidoc/asciidoc-pve.conf
>> @@ -3,6 +3,8 @@
>> proxmoxGmbh=Proxmox Server Solutions GmbH
>> copyright=Proxmox Server Solutions GmbH
>> pve=Proxmox VE
>> +pve-version=8
>> +debian-codename=bookworm
>> pricing-url=https://proxmox.com/en/proxmox-virtual-environment/pricing
>> website=https://www.proxmox.com/
>> forum-url=https://forum.proxmox.com/
>> diff --git a/pve-package-repos.adoc b/pve-package-repos.adoc
>> index c831cd9..e0a9fb5 100644
>> --- a/pve-package-repos.adoc
>> +++ b/pve-package-repos.adoc
>> @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ security updates, bug fixes and new features.
>> APT Repositories are defined in the file `/etc/apt/sources.list` and in `.list`
>> files placed in `/etc/apt/sources.list.d/`.
>>
>> +[[repository_management]]
>> Repository Management
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Since we already have the auto-generated "_repository_management"
> anchor, I would keep it, but manually define it here. This way we do not
> break any existing references to this part of the admin guide.
In this case adding "_repository_management" seems fine to me, although
our forum shows only 2 results for it.
_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel