Support for latest Proxmox API

[romantomjak]

Hey, I'd like to help to add the vast majority of options available through the Proxmox API. I do have some concerns about client compatibility as I am certain not all options are supported by all versions of Proxmox's API, but unfortunately I have no experience building clients that support multiple versions of APIs.

Couple of questions to get the ball rolling:

• What would be the best approach to get started on this?
• What API versions does this client supports?
• How can the latest version be supported?

Thanks!

[romantomjak]

Hey @V-Paranoiaque, @carlpett and @aabouzaid from the looks of it you are the top contributors of this repository. Thought I'll ping you guys to get the ball rolling.

[aabouzaid]

Hi @romantomjak I don't use Proxmox anymore and unfortunately cannot help with that.
I hope you all the best, it looks a very useful contribution 🚀

[romantomjak]

Thank you @aabouzaid. Hopefully I'll hear some good news from others :)

[carlpett]

Hey @romantomjak,
I'm not actually a maintainer on the repo, I just submitted some patches that I needed. I think you want @ggongaware :)
But while I'm here, some thoughts on your general questions:

• You can use /api2/json/version to get the Proxmox version. However, you'll end up having to maintain a large mapping of what functions/parameters are supported for each version, and I do not believe there's great documentation of this. So quite a lot of work.
• I believe (and here @ggongaware probably knows better) that the client currently aims to support more or less the latest version, modulo what someone is actually using and thus have written support for.
• As for where to begin, I'd suggest starting with setting some aims. Maybe making error handling robuster (to deal with unknown parameters/functions) so it is somewhat clear when something isn't supported by Proxmox would be the best spent time rather than trying to solve the general problem of version compatibility?

[romantomjak]

Thank you @carlpett, that actually makes a lot of sense! I think the last point ties in nicely with test coverage as well which I think is a must!

So maybe I could first start with adding some test coverage and making things more robust along the way?

[carlpett]

Sounds like a reasonable start!
Although it'll require some setup work, I'd personally suggest aiming for more integration-style tests over than unit tests that mock out Proxmox. Maybe a Vagrant box per Proxmox version, or something similar. The tests will defintely take longer to run, but the confidence will be much higher.

[romantomjak]

That is a brilliant idea! I'll look into how to setup a proxmox vagrant box as I'm not entirely sure how proxmox virtualization will work inside a VM. Thanks for being so responsive @carlpett ❤️