)]}'
{"cinder/context.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":2759,"name":"Huang Zhiteng","email":"winston.d@gmail.com","username":"zhiteng-huang"},"change_message_id":"aa1befb968d2605a8efebdf21f1e9f3e0c1ae5b9","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":54,"context_line":"                 timestamp\u003dNone, request_id\u003dNone, auth_token\u003dNone,"},{"line_number":55,"context_line":"                 overwrite\u003dTrue, quota_class\u003dNone, service_catalog\u003dNone,"},{"line_number":56,"context_line":"                 domain\u003dNone, user_domain\u003dNone, project_domain\u003dNone,"},{"line_number":57,"context_line":"                 **kwargs):"},{"line_number":58,"context_line":"        \"\"\"Initialize RequestContext."},{"line_number":59,"context_line":""},{"line_number":60,"context_line":"        :param read_deleted: \u0027no\u0027 indicates deleted records are hidden, \u0027yes\u0027"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"1aa78d24_b6b89c76","side":"PARENT","line":57,"updated":"2016-07-12 02:11:15.000000000","message":"Do we have to remove **kwargs?  Anything other than above speicified parameters would cause unexpected keyword argument TypeError as they are no longer ignored. Would it break existing code?","commit_id":"eccc58f7afd428a2ed7fd213e9d207b9100205dc"},{"author":{"_account_id":2759,"name":"Huang Zhiteng","email":"winston.d@gmail.com","username":"zhiteng-huang"},"change_message_id":"ccf2424cc90935cc7d1971892a7cdf410770d147","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":54,"context_line":"                 timestamp\u003dNone, request_id\u003dNone, auth_token\u003dNone,"},{"line_number":55,"context_line":"                 overwrite\u003dTrue, quota_class\u003dNone, service_catalog\u003dNone,"},{"line_number":56,"context_line":"                 domain\u003dNone, user_domain\u003dNone, project_domain\u003dNone,"},{"line_number":57,"context_line":"                 **kwargs):"},{"line_number":58,"context_line":"        \"\"\"Initialize RequestContext."},{"line_number":59,"context_line":""},{"line_number":60,"context_line":"        :param read_deleted: \u0027no\u0027 indicates deleted records are hidden, \u0027yes\u0027"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"1aa78d24_5ccd1730","side":"PARENT","line":57,"updated":"2016-07-12 03:17:25.000000000","message":"I think the whole point of this patch is a better implemetation of \u0027from_dict()\u0027 method instead of removing kwargs and adding it back in consecqutive path.  I don\u0027t see the value removing it now.  What if some existing code pass in something besides these known arguments?  This change will break.","commit_id":"eccc58f7afd428a2ed7fd213e9d207b9100205dc"},{"author":{"_account_id":7191,"name":"Jamie Lennox","email":"jamielennox@gmail.com","username":"jamielennox"},"change_message_id":"9b7ae4a9f80fe2fc460fec9669fef3b9a2599c55","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":54,"context_line":"                 timestamp\u003dNone, request_id\u003dNone, auth_token\u003dNone,"},{"line_number":55,"context_line":"                 overwrite\u003dTrue, quota_class\u003dNone, service_catalog\u003dNone,"},{"line_number":56,"context_line":"                 domain\u003dNone, user_domain\u003dNone, project_domain\u003dNone,"},{"line_number":57,"context_line":"                 **kwargs):"},{"line_number":58,"context_line":"        \"\"\"Initialize RequestContext."},{"line_number":59,"context_line":""},{"line_number":60,"context_line":"        :param read_deleted: \u0027no\u0027 indicates deleted records are hidden, \u0027yes\u0027"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"1aa78d24_a5005b02","side":"PARENT","line":57,"in_reply_to":"1aa78d24_5ccd1730","updated":"2016-07-12 07:16:46.000000000","message":"I can squash the patches if it\u0027ll help. The point in separating it out like this is that it shows from a gate perspective that what i\u0027m doing here is functionally equivalent.\n\nThe end goal will involve **kwargs - but it does _not_ allow unknown kwargs because if you pass unknown kwargs to the base class it will fail. \n\nWhat do you have in mind that would be constructing Contexts that is not tested by the gate? The drivers shouldn\u0027t be anywhere near this. This is internal cinder code, I\u0027m not sure what else you want to be compatible with.","commit_id":"eccc58f7afd428a2ed7fd213e9d207b9100205dc"},{"author":{"_account_id":7191,"name":"Jamie Lennox","email":"jamielennox@gmail.com","username":"jamielennox"},"change_message_id":"a461dc00dc42eb926239e02b79b940ce93719bc2","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":54,"context_line":"                 timestamp\u003dNone, request_id\u003dNone, auth_token\u003dNone,"},{"line_number":55,"context_line":"                 overwrite\u003dTrue, quota_class\u003dNone, service_catalog\u003dNone,"},{"line_number":56,"context_line":"                 domain\u003dNone, user_domain\u003dNone, project_domain\u003dNone,"},{"line_number":57,"context_line":"                 **kwargs):"},{"line_number":58,"context_line":"        \"\"\"Initialize RequestContext."},{"line_number":59,"context_line":""},{"line_number":60,"context_line":"        :param read_deleted: \u0027no\u0027 indicates deleted records are hidden, \u0027yes\u0027"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"1aa78d24_3cabeb76","side":"PARENT","line":57,"in_reply_to":"1aa78d24_b6b89c76","updated":"2016-07-12 03:08:58.000000000","message":"That\u0027s essentially the whole point of this patch. \n\nWe need in follow on patches to reintroduce **kwargs and then pass them all down to the base class rather than have cinder have to keep changing this list. \n\nNow instead of having from_dict just pass everything through to context and ignoring the kwargs, from_dict is making sure to only pass things context understands and dropping everything else so we shouldn\u0027t break anything there.","commit_id":"eccc58f7afd428a2ed7fd213e9d207b9100205dc"},{"author":{"_account_id":2759,"name":"Huang Zhiteng","email":"winston.d@gmail.com","username":"zhiteng-huang"},"change_message_id":"aa1befb968d2605a8efebdf21f1e9f3e0c1ae5b9","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":65,"context_line":"            copy of the index is not overwritten."},{"line_number":66,"context_line":""},{"line_number":67,"context_line":"        :param kwargs: Extra arguments that might be present, but we ignore"},{"line_number":68,"context_line":"            because they possibly came in from older rpc messages."},{"line_number":69,"context_line":"        \"\"\""},{"line_number":70,"context_line":""},{"line_number":71,"context_line":"        super(RequestContext, self).__init__(auth_token\u003dauth_token,"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"1aa78d24_16b25094","side":"PARENT","line":68,"updated":"2016-07-12 02:11:15.000000000","message":"If we do want to remove **kwargs, please remove this comment as well.","commit_id":"eccc58f7afd428a2ed7fd213e9d207b9100205dc"},{"author":{"_account_id":7191,"name":"Jamie Lennox","email":"jamielennox@gmail.com","username":"jamielennox"},"change_message_id":"a461dc00dc42eb926239e02b79b940ce93719bc2","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":65,"context_line":"            copy of the index is not overwritten."},{"line_number":66,"context_line":""},{"line_number":67,"context_line":"        :param kwargs: Extra arguments that might be present, but we ignore"},{"line_number":68,"context_line":"            because they possibly came in from older rpc messages."},{"line_number":69,"context_line":"        \"\"\""},{"line_number":70,"context_line":""},{"line_number":71,"context_line":"        super(RequestContext, self).__init__(auth_token\u003dauth_token,"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"1aa78d24_bcad1b86","side":"PARENT","line":68,"in_reply_to":"1aa78d24_16b25094","updated":"2016-07-12 03:08:58.000000000","message":"Done","commit_id":"eccc58f7afd428a2ed7fd213e9d207b9100205dc"}]}