)]}'
{"/PATCHSET_LEVEL":[{"author":{"_account_id":1131,"name":"Brian Haley","email":"haleyb.dev@gmail.com","username":"brian-haley"},"change_message_id":"5973c3c18dc697d7d40c836dade2546f750a9b5c","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":3,"id":"bfc745e5_1254b37d","updated":"2026-05-07 20:10:44.000000000","message":"Hopefully Terry agrees :)","commit_id":"43bb18280403bd1c81732d2c6acc37dd51d73ada"},{"author":{"_account_id":5756,"name":"Terry Wilson","email":"twilson@redhat.com","username":"otherwiseguy"},"change_message_id":"d1de83000cfab2b888a37abdc44cd3f2a854f03e","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":3,"id":"aa124ef2_d8bd2ad2","updated":"2026-05-08 13:21:38.000000000","message":"In the linked patch on the same topic, there is a change from db_find() to db_find_rows() which changes the return type. Just curious, if we don\u0027t want to actually change the type of the return/change code, why change what it returns?\n\nMy main concern is that RowView wraps a Row object, and is supposed to be interchangeable with one, and adding code that makes it behave like a dict means there will be code that uses it like that, which means that a Row would not work in its place.\n\nNot saying I can\u0027t be convinced, but it worries me a little. I\u0027m out on PTO today and maybe some other people have thoughts on it.","commit_id":"43bb18280403bd1c81732d2c6acc37dd51d73ada"}]}