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 049646763B for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 08:39:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id ECDD6143C6 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 08:39:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [212.186.127.180]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 731C5142E9 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 08:39:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 40498448D8 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 08:39:07 +0200 (CEST) To: Dietmar Maurer , Proxmox VE development discussion , Fabian Ebner References: <20200826192710.2131502-1-t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> <2082154169.147.1598502126547@webmail.proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht Message-ID: Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 08:39:06 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:80.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/80.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2082154169.147.1598502126547@webmail.proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 1.026 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -2.239 Looks like a legit reply (A) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust 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 common] get_options: allow optional arguments "arg_params" if no ambiguity 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: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 06:39:08 -0000 On 27.08.20 06:22, Dietmar Maurer wrote: > >> If we run out of passed arguments from the user but still had defined >> "arg_params" (those params which went after the command in fixed >> order without option -- dashes) we always errored out with "not >> enough arguments". But, there are situations where the remaining >> arg_params are all marked as optional in the schema, so we do not >> need to error out in that case. > > Ok for me, but > >> A prime (future) use case is "pvesm prune-backups". Currently the >> usage is: >>> pvesm prune-backups storeid --prune-backups keep-last=1,keep-... > > I would like to have a different CLI for that: > > pvesm prune-backups storeid --keep-last 2 --keep-weekly 5 > > any opinions? > Fine for me! @Fabi, can you take a look at this? Effectively we just need to use the 'prune-backups' format defiinitions $prune_backups_format hash from Storage::Plugin directly as parameter, then we can map and pass it along to the helper.