)]}'
{"/COMMIT_MSG":[{"author":{"_account_id":5314,"name":"Brian Rosmaita","email":"rosmaita.fossdev@gmail.com","username":"brian-rosmaita"},"change_message_id":"04a4226ba542e0713b917aa35c362aaefb104941","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":22,"context_line":"NOTE:"},{"line_number":23,"context_line":"The 2 failing tests do not directly test the change incorporated"},{"line_number":24,"context_line":"in [1] and [2]. There are 15 test cases [3] written, that directly"},{"line_number":25,"context_line":"test the changes. The failing tests were added as additional tests"},{"line_number":26,"context_line":"and their failure does not mean threat to the changes [1] and [2]."},{"line_number":27,"context_line":""},{"line_number":28,"context_line":"[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/366995/"},{"line_number":29,"context_line":"[2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/324012/"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":6,"id":"1a6eadb0_55398440","line":26,"range":{"start_line":25,"start_character":18,"end_line":26,"end_character":66},"updated":"2016-12-13 19:38:16.000000000","message":"I\u0027m not so sure about this.  The 15 tests check to make sure an exception is raised for various (status, operation) combinations.  The two tests we\u0027re talking about here check to make sure you can still do add, replace on locations when the image status is \u0027queued\u0027.  While I think you\u0027re correct that the problem is the test apparatus and not your code changes, we should either replace or fix these tests in order to have proper coverage for your code change.","commit_id":"26ea57999830c455ef3cfc710ade5e92b77bc1dc"}],"glance/tests/unit/v2/test_images_resource.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":5314,"name":"Brian Rosmaita","email":"rosmaita.fossdev@gmail.com","username":"brian-rosmaita"},"change_message_id":"04a4226ba542e0713b917aa35c362aaefb104941","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":1570,"context_line":"        self.assertEqual(new_location, output.locations[1])"},{"line_number":1571,"context_line":""},{"line_number":1572,"context_line":"    def test_replace_location_possible_on_queued(self):"},{"line_number":1573,"context_line":"        self.skipTest(\u0027This test is unstable at the gate\u0027)"},{"line_number":1574,"context_line":"        self.config(show_multiple_locations\u003dTrue)"},{"line_number":1575,"context_line":"        self.images \u003d ["},{"line_number":1576,"context_line":"            _db_fixture(\u00271\u0027, owner\u003dTENANT1, checksum\u003dCHKSUM,"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":6,"id":"1a6eadb0_b54f38bc","line":1573,"updated":"2016-12-13 19:38:16.000000000","message":"Steve makes a good point about the skip message.  You want to leave sufficient information so that someone looking at this later can understand why you\u0027re skipping, and whether the test still needs to be skipped.  For example, if you put \"This test is intermittently failing at the gate.  See bug #1649300\", someone could check on the bug status, and if it\u0027s been fixed, re-enable the tests.","commit_id":"26ea57999830c455ef3cfc710ade5e92b77bc1dc"}]}