)]}'
{"designate/storage/impl_sqlalchemy/__init__.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":8130,"name":"Betsy Luzader","email":"betsy.luzader@rackspace.com","username":"bluzader"},"change_message_id":"78129a5ee0a1c1787c4cbde759b06a1d6d87b5cd","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":40,"context_line":"cfg.CONF.register_opts(options.database_opts, group\u003d\u0027storage:sqlalchemy\u0027)"},{"line_number":41,"context_line":""},{"line_number":42,"context_line":""},{"line_number":43,"context_line":"def _set_object_from_model(obj, model):"},{"line_number":44,"context_line":"    \"\"\" Update a DesignateObject with the values from a SQLA Model \"\"\""},{"line_number":45,"context_line":""},{"line_number":46,"context_line":"    for fieldname in obj.FIELDS:"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"baada198_7149afb6","line":43,"updated":"2014-07-10 05:30:21.000000000","message":"This isn\u0027t even part of this patch set, but  why isn\u0027t \u0027_set_object_from_model(obj, model) part of the base.py? That way a subclass could override it if they needed to for some strange reason. Also, I would have called it get instead of set since it returns an object, but that\u0027s too picky I suppose.","commit_id":"fbdbec736973630ed43f18a036e001358b7adf26"},{"author":{"_account_id":741,"name":"Kiall Mac Innes","email":"kiall@macinnes.ie","username":"kiall"},"change_message_id":"faa064f69e17e5eb561f4e634035fcbfe9e72ec5","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":40,"context_line":"cfg.CONF.register_opts(options.database_opts, group\u003d\u0027storage:sqlalchemy\u0027)"},{"line_number":41,"context_line":""},{"line_number":42,"context_line":""},{"line_number":43,"context_line":"def _set_object_from_model(obj, model):"},{"line_number":44,"context_line":"    \"\"\" Update a DesignateObject with the values from a SQLA Model \"\"\""},{"line_number":45,"context_line":""},{"line_number":46,"context_line":"    for fieldname in obj.FIELDS:"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"baada198_6199da6d","line":43,"in_reply_to":"baada198_7149afb6","updated":"2014-07-10 09:28:30.000000000","message":"It originally was, but it let SQLA \"leak\" out of the storage layer.. If we need custom per-type stuff, we should come up with a generic way to represent that on the DesignateObject and have this method read + act on the extra data.","commit_id":"fbdbec736973630ed43f18a036e001358b7adf26"}]}