)]}'
{"/COMMIT_MSG":[{"author":{"_account_id":1653,"name":"garyk","email":"gkotton@vmware.com","username":"garyk"},"change_message_id":"09bfc5a8d7986db42d1116f82772309dced497f0","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":17,"context_line":"in the next periodic task run."},{"line_number":18,"context_line":""},{"line_number":19,"context_line":"SecurityImpact"},{"line_number":20,"context_line":""},{"line_number":21,"context_line":"Closes-Bug: 1392527"},{"line_number":22,"context_line":"Change-Id: I9866d8e32e99b9f907921f4b226edf7b62bd83a7"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":1,"id":"da20952f_2cc03ee0","line":20,"updated":"2015-09-01 18:06:01.000000000","message":"This is missing DocImpact - as we have a new periodic task and that task is using a existing configuration variable. That is something that needs to be documented. I am not sure if multiplexing on this variable is the correct thing. What id this task is to be disabled by the admin?","commit_id":"18d6b5cc79973fc553daf7a92f22cce4dc0ca013"}],"nova/compute/manager.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":1653,"name":"garyk","email":"gkotton@vmware.com","username":"garyk"},"change_message_id":"09bfc5a8d7986db42d1116f82772309dced497f0","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":6459,"context_line":""},{"line_number":6460,"context_line":"        for instance in instances:"},{"line_number":6461,"context_line":"            if instance.host !\u003d CONF.host:"},{"line_number":6462,"context_line":"                for migration in migrations:"},{"line_number":6463,"context_line":"                    if instance.uuid \u003d\u003d migration.instance_uuid:"},{"line_number":6464,"context_line":"                        # Delete instance files if not cleanup properly either"},{"line_number":6465,"context_line":"                        # from the source or destination compute nodes when"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"da20952f_8c6cea37","line":6462,"updated":"2015-09-01 18:06:01.000000000","message":"why do we need to loop over the migration again here? all of the instances above should only be those in migration? these are filtered in line 6454","commit_id":"18d6b5cc79973fc553daf7a92f22cce4dc0ca013"},{"author":{"_account_id":4393,"name":"Dan Smith","email":"dms@danplanet.com","username":"danms"},"change_message_id":"a049298de45a06af82432d0c24af4a179b9131c4","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":6459,"context_line":""},{"line_number":6460,"context_line":"        for instance in instances:"},{"line_number":6461,"context_line":"            if instance.host !\u003d CONF.host:"},{"line_number":6462,"context_line":"                for migration in migrations:"},{"line_number":6463,"context_line":"                    if instance.uuid \u003d\u003d migration.instance_uuid:"},{"line_number":6464,"context_line":"                        # Delete instance files if not cleanup properly either"},{"line_number":6465,"context_line":"                        # from the source or destination compute nodes when"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"da20952f_01f73cf6","line":6462,"in_reply_to":"da20952f_8c6cea37","updated":"2015-09-01 20:41:48.000000000","message":"I\u0027m not sure what you\u0027re saying here. We need to handle any migrations that have an instance_uuid equal to the deleted instances. That should only be one, but if so then this loop is effectively free, and if not, we wouldn\u0027t want to miss them from the perspective of marking them as handled.","commit_id":"18d6b5cc79973fc553daf7a92f22cce4dc0ca013"}]}