From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <a.lauterer@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 5118C92193 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 13 Mar 2023 13:58:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3ABE0B626 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 13 Mar 2023 13:58:03 +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>; Mon, 13 Mar 2023 13:58:02 +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 7509E44732 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 13 Mar 2023 13:58:02 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <da3d2666-97bc-9269-f7d1-e8d1103e07d0@proxmox.com> Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2023 13:58:01 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.8.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>, Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com> References: <20230113150930.857270-1-a.lauterer@proxmox.com> <20230113150930.857270-2-a.lauterer@proxmox.com> <0d08ee63-9f1e-2218-e8e7-358196d795c3@proxmox.com> <26db04bc-ce75-5f9a-a85b-01b35b036cce@proxmox.com> From: Aaron Lauterer <a.lauterer@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <26db04bc-ce75-5f9a-a85b-01b35b036cce@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.041 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 -0.001 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 1/3] api: ceph: add endpoint to fetch config keys 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: Mon, 13 Mar 2023 12:58:03 -0000 On 3/11/23 18:07, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > Am 08/03/2023 um 13:14 schrieb Dominik Csapak: >> high level: >> >> as you mentioned the path 'configkey' is not really optimal >> >> i recently mentioned off-list that we could clean this up on >> the next breaking major release with a breaking api change: >> >> have a 'config' dir and a >> 'file' >> 'db' >> and 'key'( or 'value') api endpoint inside >> that represents the different things >> >> for now a possible change could be to do it in 'config' >> but with a new parameter, though that's also not ideal >> >> any further ideas/suggestions @Thomas? > > > We could add the full > > cfg/ > raw > db > value > > now already, re-mount the 'cfg/raw' one on the current 'config' (or just keep > the code duplicated, not much gain if we remove it anyway) one and then drop that > old 'config' one in PVE 8.0; slightly hacky but IMO not that much. > > Might want to check what other uses of config, cfg, conf, configuration there are > in API path's though, as ideally we keep the total unique count of them the same ;-) AFAICT we basically only have "config" in the API paths according to the API Viewer. So 'cfg' would be something new, not yet used. I do like 'cfg' more than 'conf'. Once we dropped support for 'config', we could wait a full major release and then move it back? Not sure but 'cfg' is also only somewhat nice ;)