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 90CCE1FF164 for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 10:40:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 37AB91E90B; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 10:40:40 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2025 10:40:07 +0200 Message-Id: <D9FL2EN62NKV.59WCAUFF9R2W@proxmox.com> From: "Christoph Heiss" <c.heiss@proxmox.com> To: "Fiona Ebner" <f.ebner@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: aerc 0.20.1 References: <20250424111941.730528-1-c.heiss@proxmox.com> <20250424111941.730528-7-c.heiss@proxmox.com> <e1c0bd1a-dbdb-4f0d-92f0-e8cd55607e94@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <e1c0bd1a-dbdb-4f0d-92f0-e8cd55607e94@proxmox.com> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.030 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 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [migration.pm] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH qemu-server v2 6/13] api2: qemu: add module exposing node migration capabilities 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> Cc: 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> Thanks for the review! On Thu Apr 24, 2025 at 2:02 PM CEST, Fiona Ebner wrote: > Am 24.04.25 um 13:19 schrieb Christoph Heiss: >> diff --git a/PVE/API2/Qemu/Migration.pm b/PVE/API2/Qemu/Migration.pm >> new file mode 100644 >> index 00000000..34125a15 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/PVE/API2/Qemu/Migration.pm >> @@ -0,0 +1,46 @@ >> +package PVE::API2::Qemu::Migration; > > (Sorry, answered to v1 accidentally before) > > Would be nice to have the package name reflect that this is only for > node-side capabilities and not the QEMU-side migration capabilities. > Maybe PVE::API2::NodeCapabilities::Qemu::Migration? Makes sense, in order to avoid future conflicts as mentioned below! I'll change it with v3, probably also changing over the other node capabilities API modules if it does not have the potential to break anything. > > Otherwise, there will be a conflict if we move the other > migration-related API endpoints into a dedicated module, because the API > paths here and there have different parents. For that module, the name > PVE::API2::Qemu::Migration would be most fitting. _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel