)]}'
{"heat_integrationtests/functional/test_software_deployment_group.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":8833,"name":"Rabi Mishra","email":"ramishra@redhat.com","username":"rabi"},"change_message_id":"1f82fca93b1e8411fcc5e92a2db4521e3eb59b3a","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":113,"context_line":"            stack_identifier, \u0027deployment\u0027)"},{"line_number":114,"context_line":"        self._wait_for_stack_status(stack_identifier, \u0027UPDATE_COMPLETE\u0027,"},{"line_number":115,"context_line":"                                    signal_required\u003dTrue,"},{"line_number":116,"context_line":"                                    resources_to_signal\u003dgroup_resources)"},{"line_number":117,"context_line":""},{"line_number":118,"context_line":"        self.check_input_values(created_group_resources, \u0027foo\u0027, \u0027input2\u0027)"},{"line_number":119,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":4,"id":"7f231b9d_8e495d32","line":116,"range":{"start_line":116,"start_character":36,"end_line":116,"end_character":71},"updated":"2017-06-15 02:37:38.000000000","message":"So this would now try to signal resources which are not yet IN_PROGRESS? But we\u0027re somewhat correctly assuming that the list of resources to be signaled for the stack to reach UPDATE_COMPLETE would be the same as what we\u0027ve got when we called \u0027list_group_resources\u0027 the first time.\n\nAs we do the signaling again and again till the stack reaches CREATE/UPDATE_COMPLETE(required for rolling update and resources not yet IN_PROGRESS for normal update), probably we could have just removed the IN_PROGRESS check in signal_resources? I don\u0027t see that method being used anywhere else.","commit_id":"41b8e44d1e89440dca994bb927ecb35784d94e34"},{"author":{"_account_id":8833,"name":"Rabi Mishra","email":"ramishra@redhat.com","username":"rabi"},"change_message_id":"2717fcfc7912735ecc79e580f1961b1038f3f5c7","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":113,"context_line":"            stack_identifier, \u0027deployment\u0027)"},{"line_number":114,"context_line":"        self._wait_for_stack_status(stack_identifier, \u0027UPDATE_COMPLETE\u0027,"},{"line_number":115,"context_line":"                                    signal_required\u003dTrue,"},{"line_number":116,"context_line":"                                    resources_to_signal\u003dgroup_resources)"},{"line_number":117,"context_line":""},{"line_number":118,"context_line":"        self.check_input_values(created_group_resources, \u0027foo\u0027, \u0027input2\u0027)"},{"line_number":119,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":4,"id":"7f231b9d_787b447a","line":116,"range":{"start_line":116,"start_character":36,"end_line":116,"end_character":71},"in_reply_to":"7f231b9d_797c7f82","updated":"2017-06-16 03:12:46.000000000","message":"Yeah, my point is that would have been a simpler change and we do not have to add the code to wait for CREATE_IN_PROGRESS of the group resources.\n\nNow we\u0027ve to club this and the earlier patch for backport.","commit_id":"41b8e44d1e89440dca994bb927ecb35784d94e34"},{"author":{"_account_id":4257,"name":"Zane Bitter","email":"zbitter@redhat.com","username":"zaneb"},"change_message_id":"8a6039da4813cdd6254136ddd66fe86291a21955","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":113,"context_line":"            stack_identifier, \u0027deployment\u0027)"},{"line_number":114,"context_line":"        self._wait_for_stack_status(stack_identifier, \u0027UPDATE_COMPLETE\u0027,"},{"line_number":115,"context_line":"                                    signal_required\u003dTrue,"},{"line_number":116,"context_line":"                                    resources_to_signal\u003dgroup_resources)"},{"line_number":117,"context_line":""},{"line_number":118,"context_line":"        self.check_input_values(created_group_resources, \u0027foo\u0027, \u0027input2\u0027)"},{"line_number":119,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":4,"id":"7f231b9d_797c7f82","line":116,"range":{"start_line":116,"start_character":36,"end_line":116,"end_character":71},"in_reply_to":"7f231b9d_8e495d32","updated":"2017-06-15 13:25:46.000000000","message":"Not \u0027now\u0027; it has always worked like that. The only thing this changes is that when we check the input values we use the data that definitely contains the physical resource IDs.\n\nIt does appear that we could remove that check though.","commit_id":"41b8e44d1e89440dca994bb927ecb35784d94e34"}]}