)]}'
{"nova/db/sqlalchemy/api.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":1132,"name":"Brian Waldon","email":"brian@waldon.cc","username":"bcwaldon"},"change_message_id":"c5c97c228fa365571d2511389a2a4e2d2a06aaa8","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":152,"context_line":"            query to match the context\u0027s project_id."},{"line_number":153,"context_line":"    \"\"\""},{"line_number":154,"context_line":"    session \u003d kwargs.get(\u0027session\u0027) or get_session()"},{"line_number":155,"context_line":"    read_deleted \u003d kwargs.get(\u0027read_deleted\u0027) or context.read_deleted"},{"line_number":156,"context_line":"    project_only \u003d kwargs.get(\u0027project_only\u0027)"},{"line_number":157,"context_line":""},{"line_number":158,"context_line":"    query \u003d session.query(*args)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":5,"id":"AAAAC3%2F%2F%2BbQ%3D","line":155,"updated":"2011-12-08 15:29:04.000000000","message":"Pointing out that passing in read_deleted as a boolean flag will result in some weirdness in this or statement. I\u0027m not sure if we should do anything about sanitizing that input","commit_id":"c40ee5cfe75e8b1209dc53fc7eb2097812efa54e"},{"author":{"_account_id":475,"name":"Rick Harris","email":"rick.harris@rackspace.com","username":"rconradharris"},"change_message_id":"7c3c4c2cf379c01c8f0f286282ab756a66364bf8","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":152,"context_line":"            query to match the context\u0027s project_id."},{"line_number":153,"context_line":"    \"\"\""},{"line_number":154,"context_line":"    session \u003d kwargs.get(\u0027session\u0027) or get_session()"},{"line_number":155,"context_line":"    read_deleted \u003d kwargs.get(\u0027read_deleted\u0027) or context.read_deleted"},{"line_number":156,"context_line":"    project_only \u003d kwargs.get(\u0027project_only\u0027)"},{"line_number":157,"context_line":""},{"line_number":158,"context_line":"    query \u003d session.query(*args)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":5,"id":"AAAAC3%2F%2F%2BYY%3D","line":155,"in_reply_to":"AAAAC3%2F%2F%2BbQ%3D","updated":"2011-12-08 16:29:45.000000000","message":"Yeah, the weirdness would be passing in False (which is now meaningless) and having it fall back to the `context\u0027s.read_deleted` value.\n\nI slightly lean towards leaving out the check since there are ton\u0027s of examples of correct usage throughout the api.py file. Since most new methods are just copy and paste jobs from other parts of the api.py file, I think there is minimal risk here.\n\nBut, wouldn\u0027t see any harm in adding a value check on the kwarg as well.","commit_id":"c40ee5cfe75e8b1209dc53fc7eb2097812efa54e"}]}