)]}'
{"api-ref/source/v2/lbaas-v1.inc":[{"author":{"_account_id":7776,"name":"Paul Carver","email":"pcarver@att.com","username":"pcarver"},"change_message_id":"9105e0a06a843a4d3bdafdc423af7c139f0fca15","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":71,"context_line":"   - subnet_id: subnet_id"},{"line_number":72,"context_line":"   - tenant_id: project_id"},{"line_number":73,"context_line":"   - project_id: project_id"},{"line_number":74,"context_line":"   - admin_state_up: pool-admin_state_up-response"},{"line_number":75,"context_line":"   - vip_id: vip_id"},{"line_number":76,"context_line":"   - health_monitors_status: health_monitors_status"},{"line_number":77,"context_line":"   - members: members"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-c++src","patch_set":4,"id":"1a430d35_8ee10501","line":74,"updated":"2017-02-06 22:41:52.000000000","message":"I\u0027m not at all familiar with LBaaS architecture, but I\u0027m wondering if one of the following two options would be better:\n\n lbaas-pool_admin_state_up-response\nwhere lbaas is the component, pool_admin_state_up is the field name and response is the bit forced on us by the nature of the doc generating code or:\n\n lbaas-pool-admin_state_up-response\nwhere there is a two level namespacing with lbaas being the top level, pool being the second level and admin_state_up being the field name (and response being the same as before)","commit_id":"9abd1d99d130c41d8c60d58ca429c64731486d14"}],"api-ref/source/v2/parameters.yaml":[{"author":{"_account_id":841,"name":"Akihiro Motoki","email":"amotoki@gmail.com","username":"amotoki"},"change_message_id":"7a78a3f3a5eb923014af56b6cde62259b90aa3f2","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":342,"context_line":"  in: body"},{"line_number":343,"context_line":"  required: true"},{"line_number":344,"context_line":"  type: string"},{"line_number":345,"context_line":"admin_state_up:"},{"line_number":346,"context_line":"  description: |"},{"line_number":347,"context_line":"    The administrative state of the resource, which is"},{"line_number":348,"context_line":"    up (``true``) or down (``false``)."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":4,"id":"5a3905b3_e7393ef4","line":345,"range":{"start_line":345,"start_character":0,"end_line":345,"end_character":15},"updated":"2017-01-24 19:35:20.000000000","message":"Why do you keep admin_state_up here but drop admin_state_up-request? It looks inconsistent.\n\nIn addition, do you see a value having \u0027XXXX-admin_state_up\u0027 per resource. Only difference is a resource name in most cases.","commit_id":"9abd1d99d130c41d8c60d58ca429c64731486d14"},{"author":{"_account_id":7776,"name":"Paul Carver","email":"pcarver@att.com","username":"pcarver"},"change_message_id":"9105e0a06a843a4d3bdafdc423af7c139f0fca15","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":342,"context_line":"  in: body"},{"line_number":343,"context_line":"  required: true"},{"line_number":344,"context_line":"  type: string"},{"line_number":345,"context_line":"admin_state_up:"},{"line_number":346,"context_line":"  description: |"},{"line_number":347,"context_line":"    The administrative state of the resource, which is"},{"line_number":348,"context_line":"    up (``true``) or down (``false``)."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":4,"id":"1a430d35_4e939d4f","line":345,"range":{"start_line":345,"start_character":0,"end_line":345,"end_character":15},"in_reply_to":"5a3905b3_e7393ef4","updated":"2017-02-06 22:41:52.000000000","message":"This is a good point. If the description of admin_state_up is applicable across all (or most) subsystems then it\u0027s probably fine to share the same entry in parameters.yaml and only create distinct entries when the description (or required status) needs to be different for a rare exception.","commit_id":"9abd1d99d130c41d8c60d58ca429c64731486d14"}]}