)]}'
{"/PATCHSET_LEVEL":[{"author":{"_account_id":10342,"name":"Jay Faulkner","display_name":"JayF","email":"jay@jvf.cc","username":"JayF","status":"youtube.com/@oss-gr / podcast.gr-oss.io"},"change_message_id":"5c625d31830a5a8ef4fa959cb3bbf6ae2190249a","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":4,"id":"bc7cd3c9_0db52855","updated":"2024-03-28 19:55:44.000000000","message":"Let\u0027s just make sure we document this feature well, but as written this seems OK -- especially if you consider that you can use conductor groups to  manage situations of machine with identical drivers but different CAs.","commit_id":"d2520419a97cda8a397225cd943d367a7d4a4b76"},{"author":{"_account_id":10239,"name":"Dmitry Tantsur","email":"dtantsur@protonmail.com","username":"dtantsur"},"change_message_id":"50e012127409f8828a81efefef5785bdec868e84","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":4,"id":"3eb360a7_4c72ece5","updated":"2024-04-05 15:50:31.000000000","message":"The spec uses verify_ca and default_verify_ca_path together. I believe we settled on just verify_ca, especially since it can have boolean values. Putting my +2 based on this assumption.","commit_id":"d2520419a97cda8a397225cd943d367a7d4a4b76"}],"specs/approved/add-default-verify-ca.rst":[{"author":{"_account_id":10239,"name":"Dmitry Tantsur","email":"dtantsur@protonmail.com","username":"dtantsur"},"change_message_id":"50e012127409f8828a81efefef5785bdec868e84","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":55,"context_line":"Proposed change"},{"line_number":56,"context_line":"\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d"},{"line_number":57,"context_line":""},{"line_number":58,"context_line":"1. Adding a new option default_verify_ca_path for each driver"},{"line_number":59,"context_line":""},{"line_number":60,"context_line":"  * Adding a verify_ca option to each driver\u0027s conf to accept the specified"},{"line_number":61,"context_line":"    value. Making this option configurable on a per-driver level is"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":4,"id":"48af4ee3_71cd01af","line":58,"updated":"2024-04-05 15:50:31.000000000","message":"nit: it\u0027s called just verify_ca in the latest iteration","commit_id":"d2520419a97cda8a397225cd943d367a7d4a4b76"},{"author":{"_account_id":33828,"name":"ZhouHao","email":"zhouhao@fujitsu.com","username":"zhouhao3"},"change_message_id":"38459ca178329668b355efeda0fa6c3f20efcd76","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":55,"context_line":"Proposed change"},{"line_number":56,"context_line":"\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d"},{"line_number":57,"context_line":""},{"line_number":58,"context_line":"1. Adding a new option default_verify_ca_path for each driver"},{"line_number":59,"context_line":""},{"line_number":60,"context_line":"  * Adding a verify_ca option to each driver\u0027s conf to accept the specified"},{"line_number":61,"context_line":"    value. Making this option configurable on a per-driver level is"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":4,"id":"fa4484a5_82116919","line":58,"in_reply_to":"48af4ee3_71cd01af","updated":"2024-04-07 01:48:15.000000000","message":"updated, thanks.","commit_id":"d2520419a97cda8a397225cd943d367a7d4a4b76"},{"author":{"_account_id":10239,"name":"Dmitry Tantsur","email":"dtantsur@protonmail.com","username":"dtantsur"},"change_message_id":"50e012127409f8828a81efefef5785bdec868e84","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":130,"context_line":"Security impact"},{"line_number":131,"context_line":"---------------"},{"line_number":132,"context_line":""},{"line_number":133,"context_line":"The introduction of the default_verify_ca_path configuration option in"},{"line_number":134,"context_line":"Ironic\u0027s driver could have several security implications:"},{"line_number":135,"context_line":""},{"line_number":136,"context_line":"1. Handling of Sensitive Data:"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":4,"id":"9192d360_ebb60e0d","line":133,"updated":"2024-04-05 15:50:31.000000000","message":"just verify_ca","commit_id":"d2520419a97cda8a397225cd943d367a7d4a4b76"},{"author":{"_account_id":33828,"name":"ZhouHao","email":"zhouhao@fujitsu.com","username":"zhouhao3"},"change_message_id":"38459ca178329668b355efeda0fa6c3f20efcd76","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":130,"context_line":"Security impact"},{"line_number":131,"context_line":"---------------"},{"line_number":132,"context_line":""},{"line_number":133,"context_line":"The introduction of the default_verify_ca_path configuration option in"},{"line_number":134,"context_line":"Ironic\u0027s driver could have several security implications:"},{"line_number":135,"context_line":""},{"line_number":136,"context_line":"1. Handling of Sensitive Data:"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":4,"id":"9139a98c_a3a4abff","line":133,"in_reply_to":"9192d360_ebb60e0d","updated":"2024-04-07 01:48:15.000000000","message":"Done","commit_id":"d2520419a97cda8a397225cd943d367a7d4a4b76"}]}