Hi @carl.westman_8110 ,
Thanks for the clarification!
And just as an FYI (not a complaint at all), for that specific post... we'd really only need the stack trace. The technical details.... they were.... well, as you said, you used AI
Sometimes it can be hard for us to tell who/what writes it, but it's almost always more productive for us to get (1) copy/paste of the message from diagnostic center and, ideally, the (2) steps to cause the error.
Don't get me wrong -- we super-appreciate users who take the efforts to try to troubleshoot bugs/errors, but since they can't change ProGet's code it feels like a waste of their time. Even if their review is correct, we still have to independently reproduce/verify/test it.
Anyway we're definitely open to more endpoints or more specific feedback on enduser messages or configuration screens, etc... but we consider those on a case-by-case basis (e.g. like a new command in pgutil for example).
As an FYI ... there is a separate topic on Configuration as Code, discussed over here:
https://forums.inedo.com/topic/5644/proget-configuration-as-code-iac
Thanks,
Steve