[pdm-devel] [PATCH datacenter-manager 0/6] ui/api: implement and expose adding PBS remotes via the ui wizard

[Lukas Wagner]

On Mon Sep 22, 2025 at 1:09 PM CEST, Christian Ebner wrote:
> While it is already possible to add PBS remote via the cli, the UI currently
> does not expose this functionality. Most of the required pieces are however
> already there, so implement the missing api endpoints to check the TLS
> connection and scan the remote for the PDM api and add the required methods to
> the PDM client.
>
> Finally, make sure the correct PDM implementation for PBS is used based on the
> remote type as stored in the remote add wizard state and expose the button
> to add the PBS instance.
>
> datacenter-manager:
>
> Christian Ebner (6):
>   server: api: add TLS probe endpoint for PBS
>   pdm-client: add method to probe TLS connection for PBS remotes
>   server: api: implement endpoint to scan remote PBS instances
>   pdm client: add method to scan remote PBS instances
>   ui: remote: check connection for PBS remotes in remote add wizard
>   ui: reorganize remote add button as dropdown menu to allow adding PBS
>
>  lib/pdm-client/src/lib.rs             |  90 +++++++++++++++-------
>  server/src/api/pbs/mod.rs             | 107 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  ui/src/remotes/add_wizard.rs          |   2 +-
>  ui/src/remotes/config.rs              |  42 +++++-----
>  ui/src/remotes/wizard_page_connect.rs |  16 ++--
>  ui/src/remotes/wizard_page_info.rs    |  25 ++++--
>  6 files changed, 211 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-)
>
>
> Summary over all repositories:
>   6 files changed, 211 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-)

Looks good to me. I applied this on the latest master and give it a
spin.

Reviewed-by: Lukas Wagner <l.wagner at proxmox.com>
Tested-by: Lukas Wagner <l.wagner at proxmox.com>

The only thing that I noticed is that when creating a new API token via
the wizard, further API calls to actually give this new token adequate
permissions are needed, since PBS enforces privilege-separation for API
tokens. For PVE this is not a problem, since there we just don't use
privilege-separation, so the token has the same privs as the user.