[pdm-devel] [PATCH datacenter-manager v3 02/18] lib: api-types: add 'layout' property to ViewConfig

[Dominik Csapak]

On 11/24/25 10:55 AM, Dominik Csapak wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/17/25 3:57 PM, Shannon Sterz wrote:
>> On Mon Nov 17, 2025 at 1:44 PM CET, Dominik Csapak wrote:
>>> this is a simple string that holds the layout json. We can't currently
>>> add it as a normal property with 'correct' api types, since we want to
>>> use enum features that are not available with the api macro.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak at proxmox.com>
>>> ---
>>>   lib/pdm-api-types/src/views.rs | 12 +++++++++++-
>>>   server/src/views/tests.rs      | 15 +++++++++++++++
>>>   2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/lib/pdm-api-types/src/views.rs b/lib/pdm-api-types/src/ 
>>> views.rs
>>> index ef39cc62..4b837384 100644
>>> --- a/lib/pdm-api-types/src/views.rs
>>> +++ b/lib/pdm-api-types/src/views.rs
>>> @@ -47,7 +47,10 @@ pub const FILTER_RULE_LIST_SCHEMA: Schema =
>>>           "exclude": {
>>>               schema: FILTER_RULE_LIST_SCHEMA,
>>>               optional: true,
>>> -        }
>>> +        },
>>> +        layout: {
>>> +            optional: true,
>>> +        },
>>>       }
>>>   )]
>>>   #[derive(Clone, Debug, Default, Deserialize, Serialize, Updater, 
>>> PartialEq)]
>>> @@ -67,6 +70,13 @@ pub struct ViewConfig {
>>>       #[serde(default, skip_serializing_if = "Vec::is_empty")]
>>>       #[updater(serde(skip_serializing_if = "Option::is_none"))]
>>>       pub exclude: Vec<FilterRule>,
>>> +
>>> +    // we can't currently describe this with the 'api' macro so save
>>> +    // it simply as a string and check it in the add/update call
>>
>> one question: shouldn't this be `Value` instead? right now this needs to
>> be a string that is valid json. meaning that the api expects a json body
>> that contains `layout` as a string, with that string being escaped json
>> again.
>>
>> with `Value` this could be the json directly, avoiding having to escape
>> the json string. this would also make it easier to describe this later
>> on via the api macro if i'm not mistaken. the last commit in this series
>> could then also be dropped.
>>
>> what do you think?
> 
> had a short look and it seems like that we can't currently combine
> the Updater derivation with Value since there is no
> impl of UpdaterType/ApiType for Value and we can't provide one.
> 
> i shortly tried to implment a wrapper type, but then we run into
> the issue that we'd have to impl ApiType for that too and
> the fact that we can't currently represent the Layout in a schema is
> the whole point of the string workaround here.
> 
> The only thing that could work here is to simply define
> an ObjectSchema with no properties and 'additional_properties' to true.
> I'll try that and see if it makes the situation better.
> 
ok this won't work AFAICS since the section config currently only
does a 'parse_simple_value' which can't handle object schemas

so i think using strings here is currently the best way to handle
this (besides making section config have complex types in its values
instead of just 'simple' values. but this seems a bit out of
scope for this for now?)