)]}'
{"/COMMIT_MSG":[{"author":{"_account_id":5046,"name":"Lance Bragstad","email":"lbragstad@redhat.com","username":"ldbragst"},"change_message_id":"c2cfb58b5d3df444ac297a8e9fe3b61d3a0b7eda","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":8,"context_line":""},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"The `test_bad_authorizing_roles_id` was using .admin_request and not"},{"line_number":10,"context_line":"actually hitting the routed controller method as .admin_request does"},{"line_number":11,"context_line":"not prepend /v3 to the url returned from ._authoriz_request_token."},{"line_number":12,"context_line":""},{"line_number":13,"context_line":"`test_bad_authorizing_roles_id` was therefore erroneously expecting a"},{"line_number":14,"context_line":"404 response instead of a proper 401 indicating the user is not"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":1,"id":"5f7c97a3_a3013907","line":11,"updated":"2018-06-04 14:08:51.000000000","message":"nit: authorize*","commit_id":"40f9086b6ef5f6e01895e2c2115ea9ab9b9acd2b"}],"keystone/tests/unit/test_v3_oauth1.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":5046,"name":"Lance Bragstad","email":"lbragstad@redhat.com","username":"ldbragst"},"change_message_id":"c2cfb58b5d3df444ac297a8e9fe3b61d3a0b7eda","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":895,"context_line":"        # 404 because an unrouted URI was being hit. It is correct to get a 401"},{"line_number":896,"context_line":"        # error back as the role is not in the superset of roles the user"},{"line_number":897,"context_line":"        # has at the time of the Authorization."},{"line_number":898,"context_line":"        self.put(path\u003durl, body\u003dbody, expected_status\u003dhttp_client.UNAUTHORIZED)"},{"line_number":899,"context_line":""},{"line_number":900,"context_line":"    def test_bad_authorizing_roles_name(self):"},{"line_number":901,"context_line":"        consumer \u003d self._create_single_consumer()"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"5f7c97a3_c3d795ee","line":898,"updated":"2018-06-04 14:08:51.000000000","message":"This appears to have regressed the test coverage of authorize_request_token. The original test covered the entire method with one conditional that was never false [0]. The new test no longer asserts some error conditioning at the end of authorize_request_token [1]. I assume this is because we\u0027re using the correct path and expecting a 401 instead of a 404.\n\nDo we need that conditional or can we add a separate test that adds coverage for it?\n\n[0] http://logs.openstack.org/12/571912/1/check/openstack-tox-cover/85d317d/cover/keystone_oauth1_controllers_py.html#n382\n[1] http://logs.openstack.org/11/571911/1/check/openstack-tox-cover/71c443c/cover/keystone_oauth1_controllers_py.html#n382","commit_id":"40f9086b6ef5f6e01895e2c2115ea9ab9b9acd2b"}]}