)]}'
{"/PATCHSET_LEVEL":[{"author":{"_account_id":5314,"name":"Brian Rosmaita","email":"rosmaita.fossdev@gmail.com","username":"brian-rosmaita"},"change_message_id":"027b65c9d18d127287abab316e103a670cf26fbd","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"c9cd485e_db2d3ddb","updated":"2025-10-17 23:31:50.000000000","message":"As I mentioned on the master patch, this change does not modify API response format. The \u0027host_name\u0027 has always been returned; whether it was populated or not depended on the credentials of the requestor, which is still the case after this patch.  This is a low risk change and meets backport criteria.","commit_id":"1d59848eb6ea960cdd52c0698c84c251b0c4b788"},{"author":{"_account_id":15554,"name":"Bence Romsics","email":"bence.romsics@gmail.com","username":"ebenrom","status":"working for Ericsson, UTC+1 (+DST)"},"change_message_id":"720e1a504846ff68bee9722d2519a4a2a811e14e","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"6b9f9f78_def90ddf","updated":"2025-10-15 11:21:49.000000000","message":"It would be nice to have this fix available in Expoxy: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/glance_store/+/962408. We can use glance_store 5.3.0, when that gets released. However that depends on this cinder change. I wonder if this cinder change is considered backportable. I was somewhat surprised to see no microversion bump in it. But if there\u0027s no microversion then maybe we could backport it? What do you think?","commit_id":"1d59848eb6ea960cdd52c0698c84c251b0c4b788"},{"author":{"_account_id":27615,"name":"Rajat Dhasmana","email":"rajatdhasmana@gmail.com","username":"whoami-rajat"},"change_message_id":"d094812b42068b6f1b9c6780e799bfffe951a0ec","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"7a2ca324_71eb1d23","updated":"2025-10-16 13:22:49.000000000","message":"master patch merged in 2026.1, clean cherry pick for 2025.2, LGTM.","commit_id":"1d59848eb6ea960cdd52c0698c84c251b0c4b788"},{"author":{"_account_id":15554,"name":"Bence Romsics","email":"bence.romsics@gmail.com","username":"ebenrom","status":"working for Ericsson, UTC+1 (+DST)"},"change_message_id":"18c2a776d366b468797ff1fcf748a2a56cb176c3","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"6c032026_81a5da59","updated":"2025-10-16 08:30:57.000000000","message":"recheck: keystone uwsgi segfault: one-off or repeatable?","commit_id":"1d59848eb6ea960cdd52c0698c84c251b0c4b788"},{"author":{"_account_id":27615,"name":"Rajat Dhasmana","email":"rajatdhasmana@gmail.com","username":"whoami-rajat"},"change_message_id":"d094812b42068b6f1b9c6780e799bfffe951a0ec","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"e4594268_6e390e23","in_reply_to":"6b9f9f78_def90ddf","updated":"2025-10-16 13:22:49.000000000","message":"The reason there is no MV bump is that we are not adding any new fields to the response.\nWe still have the same field `host_name` which used to report `None` for non-admins and the actual host value for admins. We increased the scope to `services` like glance who want to access this information in a secure way but overall this change has no end user impact.","commit_id":"1d59848eb6ea960cdd52c0698c84c251b0c4b788"}]}