)]}'
{"/COMMIT_MSG":[{"author":{"_account_id":11604,"name":"sean mooney","email":"smooney@redhat.com","username":"sean-k-mooney"},"change_message_id":"c3d350fcde956cdb0d58e27fe20c038bc1a9f37b","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":7,"context_line":"scheduler: support shared tenant placement aggregates"},{"line_number":8,"context_line":""},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"Add an optional scheduler mode that includes aggregates marked with"},{"line_number":10,"context_line":"filter_tenant_id\u003dall in tenant aggregate placement filtering."},{"line_number":11,"context_line":""},{"line_number":12,"context_line":"This preserves the existing tenant-specific metadata handling,"},{"line_number":13,"context_line":"including suffixed keys such as filter_tenant_id:1, while adding"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":7,"id":"f9fcfda4_7330b50c","line":10,"updated":"2026-05-29 17:40:08.000000000","message":"im not against this idea but this is really a new feature rigth so its\nat least a specless blueprint\n\ni think we can avoid a spec or micoveriosn here perhaps  as project ids are not reqruied to be uuids so addign all techinially is not changign the input validation\nbut it will need proper docuemention","commit_id":"8f761e0fffe954c981ade4332f517911b4649da9"}],"nova/conf/scheduler.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":11604,"name":"sean mooney","email":"smooney@redhat.com","username":"sean-k-mooney"},"change_message_id":"c3d350fcde956cdb0d58e27fe20c038bc1a9f37b","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":177,"context_line":""},{"line_number":178,"context_line":"- ``[scheduler] limit_tenants_to_placement_aggregate``"},{"line_number":179,"context_line":"- ``[scheduler] placement_aggregate_required_for_tenants``"},{"line_number":180,"context_line":"\"\"\"),"},{"line_number":181,"context_line":"    cfg.BoolOpt(\"query_placement_for_image_type_support\","},{"line_number":182,"context_line":"        default\u003dFalse,"},{"line_number":183,"context_line":"        help\u003d\"\"\""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":7,"id":"c3255fe1_6df9c63e","line":180,"updated":"2026-05-29 17:40:08.000000000","message":"this is kind of doubling down on config driven api behvior\n\ni guess the reason is for perforamce so that we dont looks for aggreates with all when clodu dont use that functionaltiy. hence the default to9 false?","commit_id":"8f761e0fffe954c981ade4332f517911b4649da9"}],"releasenotes/notes/shared-tenant-placement-aggregates-f5084913572a7163.yaml":[{"author":{"_account_id":11604,"name":"sean mooney","email":"smooney@redhat.com","username":"sean-k-mooney"},"change_message_id":"c3d350fcde956cdb0d58e27fe20c038bc1a9f37b","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":7,"id":"b4bf43db_0836ac2e","line":10,"updated":"2026-05-29 17:40:08.000000000","message":"as noted in the commit i could see this beign argured as small enouch for a specless blueprint but a its missing that and b\nwe will need to update https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/admin/aggregates.html#tenant-isolation-with-placement to docuemnt this","commit_id":"8f761e0fffe954c981ade4332f517911b4649da9"}]}