On 10/28/19 3:13 PM, Wolfgang Bumiller wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 02:26:28PM +0100, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
>> On 10/28/19 12:20 PM, Wolfgang Bumiller wrote:
>>> +register_standard_option('pve-tfa-secret', {
>>> + description => "A TFA secret, base32 encoded or hexadecimal.",
>>> + type => 'string', format => 'pve-tfa-secret',
>>> +});
>>> +
>>
>> Why do you register a standard option but then do not use it?
>> But actually, I like using the format more, IMO this is essential to
>> PVE/MG, and thus should not be a standard-option at all, so I'd rather
>> just remove the registering here, and keep the access-control API patch
>> as is.
>
> Right, I did the pve-common change first and thought it would make sense
> as an option (as the description would be used in pve & pmg), but then
> in pve-access-control thought the meaning of the actual API parameter
> might change in the future with updates/changes to second factors and
> then did not remove it afterwards, sorry.
>
> Should I resend or will you fix it up when applying?
>
I've fixed this patch up and applied it, thanks!
_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@pve.proxmox.com
https://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel
