)]}'
{"/COMMIT_MSG":[{"author":{"_account_id":4601,"name":"Tiago Mello","email":"tmello@linux.vnet.ibm.com","username":"tmello"},"change_message_id":"b44f8e9e8756fc9869746cf0e9b6dd903f40a954","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":15,"context_line":"This patch does that, and also adds missing tests for these two"},{"line_number":16,"context_line":"methods to verify the normal and exception-wrapped behavior."},{"line_number":17,"context_line":""},{"line_number":18,"context_line":"Fixes bug 1233789"},{"line_number":19,"context_line":""},{"line_number":20,"context_line":"Change-Id: I505462fa429a6aa68e7b8a08ec2b704bf18d029c"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":1,"id":"AAAAS3%2F%2FPCo%3D","line":18,"updated":"2013-10-01 19:52:20.000000000","message":"Shouldn\u0027t we use Closes-Bug: #1233789 ?\n\nhttps://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/GitCommitMessages","commit_id":"10ffa743f639d5684f79ae098e271958d7bebe06"},{"author":{"_account_id":6873,"name":"Matt Riedemann","email":"mriedem.os@gmail.com","username":"mriedem"},"change_message_id":"1929a31c2466f9105e03cbfcbe9a33d5926b4ffd","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":15,"context_line":"This patch does that, and also adds missing tests for these two"},{"line_number":16,"context_line":"methods to verify the normal and exception-wrapped behavior."},{"line_number":17,"context_line":""},{"line_number":18,"context_line":"Fixes bug 1233789"},{"line_number":19,"context_line":""},{"line_number":20,"context_line":"Change-Id: I505462fa429a6aa68e7b8a08ec2b704bf18d029c"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":1,"id":"AAAAS3%2F%2FO%2FU%3D","line":18,"in_reply_to":"AAAAS3%2F%2FPCo%3D","updated":"2013-10-01 20:09:09.000000000","message":"Yeah, but it\u0027s a nit, the old way still works.","commit_id":"10ffa743f639d5684f79ae098e271958d7bebe06"}],"nova/tests/conductor/test_conductor.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":2835,"name":"Brian Elliott","email":"bdelliott@gmail.com","username":"belliott"},"change_message_id":"c653c8b92622a6308c3688ed6b0b24115ce80959","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":846,"context_line":"                self.context, TestObject.obj_name(), \u0027bar\u0027, \u00271.0\u0027,"},{"line_number":847,"context_line":"                tuple(), {\u0027raise_exception\u0027: raise_exception})"},{"line_number":848,"context_line":"        else:"},{"line_number":849,"context_line":"            updates, result \u003d self.conductor.object_action("},{"line_number":850,"context_line":"                self.context, obj, \u0027foo\u0027, tuple(),"},{"line_number":851,"context_line":"                {\u0027raise_exception\u0027: raise_exception})"},{"line_number":852,"context_line":"        self.assertEqual(\u0027test\u0027, result)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"AAAAS3%2F%2FLs4%3D","line":849,"updated":"2013-10-02 19:23:25.000000000","message":"Dan, is the \"updates\" logic in object_action on the conductor manager getting tested somewhere?  Obviously there are none for this trivial \u0027foo\u0027 test method.","commit_id":"3a5e1faee04671f2e88b28d805b191b480054254"},{"author":{"_account_id":2835,"name":"Brian Elliott","email":"bdelliott@gmail.com","username":"belliott"},"change_message_id":"720763cee2f9291d49b34bbd3e5958bcc49c4fe6","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":846,"context_line":"                self.context, TestObject.obj_name(), \u0027bar\u0027, \u00271.0\u0027,"},{"line_number":847,"context_line":"                tuple(), {\u0027raise_exception\u0027: raise_exception})"},{"line_number":848,"context_line":"        else:"},{"line_number":849,"context_line":"            updates, result \u003d self.conductor.object_action("},{"line_number":850,"context_line":"                self.context, obj, \u0027foo\u0027, tuple(),"},{"line_number":851,"context_line":"                {\u0027raise_exception\u0027: raise_exception})"},{"line_number":852,"context_line":"        self.assertEqual(\u0027test\u0027, result)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"AAAAS3%2F%2FLRE%3D","line":849,"in_reply_to":"AAAAS3%2F%2FLXQ%3D","updated":"2013-10-02 21:42:50.000000000","message":"Works for me.","commit_id":"3a5e1faee04671f2e88b28d805b191b480054254"},{"author":{"_account_id":4393,"name":"Dan Smith","email":"dms@danplanet.com","username":"danms"},"change_message_id":"a1b0496e8ed33acb08ad685169badb8c1ef771b1","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":846,"context_line":"                self.context, TestObject.obj_name(), \u0027bar\u0027, \u00271.0\u0027,"},{"line_number":847,"context_line":"                tuple(), {\u0027raise_exception\u0027: raise_exception})"},{"line_number":848,"context_line":"        else:"},{"line_number":849,"context_line":"            updates, result \u003d self.conductor.object_action("},{"line_number":850,"context_line":"                self.context, obj, \u0027foo\u0027, tuple(),"},{"line_number":851,"context_line":"                {\u0027raise_exception\u0027: raise_exception})"},{"line_number":852,"context_line":"        self.assertEqual(\u0027test\u0027, result)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"AAAAS3%2F%2FLXQ%3D","line":849,"in_reply_to":"AAAAS3%2F%2FLs4%3D","updated":"2013-10-02 21:19:59.000000000","message":"Yeah, that gets tested as part of the greater objects tests, although it could certainly use a more specific and targeted test here. This adds a test for object_action() so it can validate the behavior it\u0027s fixing, so I think adding a more general-purpose verification would be okay done outside of this patch, agree?","commit_id":"3a5e1faee04671f2e88b28d805b191b480054254"}]}