)]}'
{"/COMMIT_MSG":[{"author":{"_account_id":10239,"name":"Dmitry Tantsur","email":"dtantsur@protonmail.com","username":"dtantsur"},"change_message_id":"7127c143d577e5422386b038504b98bc09c5d2a8","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":8,"context_line":""},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"This fixes some of the conductor-manager\u0027s unit tests; mostly the"},{"line_number":10,"context_line":"cleaning-related ones. Some of the mocking was incorrect (e.g."},{"line_number":11,"context_line":"mocked calls), because \u0027autospec\u003dTrue\u0027 was not specified."},{"line_number":12,"context_line":""},{"line_number":13,"context_line":"Change-Id: I0b7988818e0ea72328bcc246ab22d2094d233444"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":1,"id":"5f7c97a3_00a71eaa","line":11,"updated":"2018-06-23 10:23:01.000000000","message":"Well, it\u0027s mostly missing explicit \"self\", which is an annoying property of autospec..","commit_id":"6c301e7e80d40760a3ce506455e340adabfc4739"},{"author":{"_account_id":6618,"name":"Ruby Loo","email":"opensrloo@gmail.com","username":"rloo"},"change_message_id":"06d128684d446732d155cd3522786e01b8631b08","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":8,"context_line":""},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"This fixes some of the conductor-manager\u0027s unit tests; mostly the"},{"line_number":10,"context_line":"cleaning-related ones. Some of the mocking was incorrect (e.g."},{"line_number":11,"context_line":"mocked calls), because \u0027autospec\u003dTrue\u0027 was not specified."},{"line_number":12,"context_line":""},{"line_number":13,"context_line":"Change-Id: I0b7988818e0ea72328bcc246ab22d2094d233444"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":1,"id":"5f7c97a3_c292789f","line":11,"in_reply_to":"5f7c97a3_00a71eaa","updated":"2018-06-25 14:05:37.000000000","message":"True! If I recall, there is actually one incorrect test, where it was doing something like mockx.assert_called \u003d ... instead of mockx.assert_called() ! I think to track that down, I went through the rat hole of trying to understand why the tests were even working...\n\nAll this to fix some minor thing (see related/following patch https://review.openstack.org/#/c/577490/1) :)","commit_id":"6c301e7e80d40760a3ce506455e340adabfc4739"}],"ironic/tests/unit/conductor/test_manager.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":13689,"name":"Hironori Shiina","email":"Hironori.Shiina@fujitsu.com","username":"shiina"},"change_message_id":"b1d9a0c54b49532acedd0c74cb823e6da1191755","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":2504,"context_line":"        node.refresh()"},{"line_number":2505,"context_line":"        self.assertEqual(states.CLEANWAIT, node.provision_state)"},{"line_number":2506,"context_line":"        self.assertEqual(tgt_prov_state, node.target_provision_state)"},{"line_number":2507,"context_line":"        mock_prep.assert_called_once_with(mock.ANY, mock.ANY)"},{"line_number":2508,"context_line":"        mock_validate.assert_called_once_with(mock.ANY, mock.ANY)"},{"line_number":2509,"context_line":""},{"line_number":2510,"context_line":"    def test__do_node_clean_automated_prepare_clean_wait(self):"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"5f7c97a3_76ffb765","line":2507,"range":{"start_line":2507,"start_character":52,"end_line":2507,"end_character":60},"updated":"2018-06-25 02:04:50.000000000","message":"nit: Would it better to use task like __do_node_clean_prepare_clean_fail() above?","commit_id":"6c301e7e80d40760a3ce506455e340adabfc4739"},{"author":{"_account_id":6618,"name":"Ruby Loo","email":"opensrloo@gmail.com","username":"rloo"},"change_message_id":"06d128684d446732d155cd3522786e01b8631b08","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":2504,"context_line":"        node.refresh()"},{"line_number":2505,"context_line":"        self.assertEqual(states.CLEANWAIT, node.provision_state)"},{"line_number":2506,"context_line":"        self.assertEqual(tgt_prov_state, node.target_provision_state)"},{"line_number":2507,"context_line":"        mock_prep.assert_called_once_with(mock.ANY, mock.ANY)"},{"line_number":2508,"context_line":"        mock_validate.assert_called_once_with(mock.ANY, mock.ANY)"},{"line_number":2509,"context_line":""},{"line_number":2510,"context_line":"    def test__do_node_clean_automated_prepare_clean_wait(self):"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"5f7c97a3_026f10c4","line":2507,"range":{"start_line":2507,"start_character":52,"end_line":2507,"end_character":60},"in_reply_to":"5f7c97a3_76ffb765","updated":"2018-06-25 14:05:37.000000000","message":"yes, but I didn\u0027t want to make too many changes. I don\u0027t like using \u0027task\u0027 unless it is under the with... part, because there is never any guarantee outside the with..., that \u0027task\u0027 is valid any more, so it is bad programming practice in my mind.","commit_id":"6c301e7e80d40760a3ce506455e340adabfc4739"}]}