)]}'
{"/COMMIT_MSG":[{"author":{"_account_id":14070,"name":"Eric Fried","email":"openstack@fried.cc","username":"efried"},"change_message_id":"2108a7bef85bd4a9f3df875912c43f7887d84e8d","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":15,"context_line":""},{"line_number":16,"context_line":"This patch fixes the bug changing it to consider the aggregates"},{"line_number":17,"context_line":"not only on root rps but also on the nested rp itself."},{"line_number":18,"context_line":""},{"line_number":19,"context_line":"Change-Id: I9a11a577174f85a1b47a9e895bb25cadd90bd2ea"},{"line_number":20,"context_line":"Closes-Bug: #1792503"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":1,"id":"3f79a3b5_faedf3b7","line":18,"updated":"2018-09-18 19:08:01.000000000","message":"Following discussion at [1], I think the wording here needs to be clarified. (That will come out in the reno as well.) It needs to be clear that we\u0027ll match any provider in the tree based on the *root* provider being in a specified aggregate. Any other provider in the tree being a member of a specified aggregate will still only match that provider.\n\n(Future me: This seems wrong in terms of imposing special \"directionality\" or favoritism for the root provider, an asymmetry which may be confusing for the user to understand. But it makes sense if you think through the use cases and what it would mean for a child provider to be lassoed in an aggregate that the root - and especially other children - are not a part of.)\n\n[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/603352/2/specs/stein/approved/alloc-candidates-negative-member-of.rst@126","commit_id":"332163aae89cecf99ba3d500681bd12061d06cd2"}],"api-ref/source/parameters.yaml":[{"author":{"_account_id":14070,"name":"Eric Fried","email":"openstack@fried.cc","username":"efried"},"change_message_id":"e3b0179cc4f3381bcb4c7f01f6d48bf93343e103","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":70,"context_line":"  description: \u003e"},{"line_number":71,"context_line":"    A string representing an aggregate uuid; or the prefix ``in:`` followed by"},{"line_number":72,"context_line":"    a comma-separated list of strings representing aggregate uuids. The"},{"line_number":73,"context_line":"    returned resource providers must directly be associated with at least one"},{"line_number":74,"context_line":"    of the aggregates identified by uuid::"},{"line_number":75,"context_line":""},{"line_number":76,"context_line":"        member_of\u003d5e08ea53-c4c6-448e-9334-ac4953de3cfa"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_1722c001","line":73,"range":{"start_line":73,"start_character":37,"end_line":73,"end_character":45},"updated":"2018-09-21 14:35:33.000000000","message":"++","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":14070,"name":"Eric Fried","email":"openstack@fried.cc","username":"efried"},"change_message_id":"e3b0179cc4f3381bcb4c7f01f6d48bf93343e103","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":114,"context_line":"  description: \u003e"},{"line_number":115,"context_line":"    A string representing an aggregate uuid; or the prefix ``in:`` followed by"},{"line_number":116,"context_line":"    a comma-separated list of strings representing aggregate uuids. The"},{"line_number":117,"context_line":"    returned resource providers must be associated with at least one of the"},{"line_number":118,"context_line":"    aggregates identified by uuid. The parameter key is ``member_ofN``, where"},{"line_number":119,"context_line":"    ``N`` represents a positive integer suffix corresponding with a"},{"line_number":120,"context_line":"    ``resourcesN`` parameter.  The value format is the same as for the"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_f7cf0454","line":117,"range":{"start_line":117,"start_character":37,"end_line":117,"end_character":50},"updated":"2018-09-21 14:35:33.000000000","message":"Should add \"directly\" here as well.","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"}],"placement/objects/resource_provider.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":11564,"name":"Chris Dent","email":"cdent@anticdent.org","username":"chdent"},"change_message_id":"fee380352b69a02943ffc8560d38f506fd1a6af1","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":3240,"context_line":"    # If \u0027member_of\u0027 has values, do a separate lookup to identify the"},{"line_number":3241,"context_line":"    # resource providers that meet the member_of constraints."},{"line_number":3242,"context_line":"    if member_of:"},{"line_number":3243,"context_line":"        all_rp_ids \u003d set(p[0] for p in provs_with_inv) | trees_with_inv"},{"line_number":3244,"context_line":"        rps_in_aggs \u003d _provider_ids_matching_aggregates(ctx, member_of,"},{"line_number":3245,"context_line":"                                                        rp_ids\u003dall_rp_ids)"},{"line_number":3246,"context_line":"        if not rps_in_aggs:"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"3f79a3b5_e0b34b09","line":3243,"updated":"2018-09-14 16:10:57.000000000","message":"\"all\" is a weird name here. It implies every single rp in the system. Is there perhaps a better name?","commit_id":"332163aae89cecf99ba3d500681bd12061d06cd2"}],"releasenotes/notes/bug-1792503-member-of-5c10df94caf3bd08.yaml":[{"author":{"_account_id":14070,"name":"Eric Fried","email":"openstack@fried.cc","username":"efried"},"change_message_id":"e3b0179cc4f3381bcb4c7f01f6d48bf93343e103","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":1,"context_line":"---"},{"line_number":2,"context_line":"fixes:"},{"line_number":3,"context_line":"  - |"},{"line_number":4,"context_line":"    When an aggregate is specified by ``member_of`` query parameter in"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_a9c4d460","line":1,"updated":"2018-09-21 14:35:33.000000000","message":"Accumulating the below, let me try a reword:\n\nPreviously, when an aggregate was specified by a ``member_of`` query parameter to the ``GET /allocation_candidates`` operation, all providers in the resulting candidates had to be directly associated with the aggregate. With this release, nested providers associated indirectly via their root provider are also considered. See \u003clinkylink bug #XXXX\u003e for details.","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":14070,"name":"Eric Fried","email":"openstack@fried.cc","username":"efried"},"change_message_id":"f6c9fd8187f717bb4c2f6901e23bd3645e21eef2","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":1,"context_line":"---"},{"line_number":2,"context_line":"fixes:"},{"line_number":3,"context_line":"  - |"},{"line_number":4,"context_line":"    When an aggregate is specified by ``member_of`` query parameter in"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_1e5b7ff6","line":1,"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_13a29fae","updated":"2018-09-25 16:26:16.000000000","message":"You\u0027re correct as usual, Tetsuro. I did have it backwards before.","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":25625,"name":"Tetsuro Nakamura","email":"tetsuro.nakamura.bc@hco.ntt.co.jp","username":"tetsuro0907"},"change_message_id":"a045ce718382bf40c118f982320fb91143065e59","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":1,"context_line":"---"},{"line_number":2,"context_line":"fixes:"},{"line_number":3,"context_line":"  - |"},{"line_number":4,"context_line":"    When an aggregate is specified by ``member_of`` query parameter in"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_13a29fae","line":1,"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_a9c4d460","updated":"2018-09-25 12:08:57.000000000","message":"I like this \"Previously... With this release\" format of sentence. I took it. But what is written in your comment is wrong. It *did* include the nested providers associated *indirectly* via their root provider. It was completely a opposite bug that it excluded nested providers that are directly associated with the aggregate if their root providers are not in the aggregate.\n\nCould you please see the test cases and the description in the previous patch more closely?","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":14070,"name":"Eric Fried","email":"openstack@fried.cc","username":"efried"},"change_message_id":"e3b0179cc4f3381bcb4c7f01f6d48bf93343e103","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":1,"context_line":"---"},{"line_number":2,"context_line":"fixes:"},{"line_number":3,"context_line":"  - |"},{"line_number":4,"context_line":"    When an aggregate is specified by ``member_of`` query parameter in"},{"line_number":5,"context_line":"    ``GET /allocation_candidates`` API, the providers directly"},{"line_number":6,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate and the providers whose root is"},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate should be in the candidates. However,"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_575a7881","line":4,"range":{"start_line":4,"start_character":35,"end_line":4,"end_character":37},"updated":"2018-09-21 14:35:33.000000000","message":"\"by the\" - or perhaps better, \"by a\".","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":14070,"name":"Eric Fried","email":"openstack@fried.cc","username":"efried"},"change_message_id":"e3b0179cc4f3381bcb4c7f01f6d48bf93343e103","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":1,"context_line":"---"},{"line_number":2,"context_line":"fixes:"},{"line_number":3,"context_line":"  - |"},{"line_number":4,"context_line":"    When an aggregate is specified by ``member_of`` query parameter in"},{"line_number":5,"context_line":"    ``GET /allocation_candidates`` API, the providers directly"},{"line_number":6,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate and the providers whose root is"},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate should be in the candidates. However,"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_b74aeca9","line":4,"range":{"start_line":4,"start_character":68,"end_line":4,"end_character":70},"updated":"2018-09-21 14:35:33.000000000","message":"\"in the\" or \"to the\"","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":25625,"name":"Tetsuro Nakamura","email":"tetsuro.nakamura.bc@hco.ntt.co.jp","username":"tetsuro0907"},"change_message_id":"a045ce718382bf40c118f982320fb91143065e59","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":1,"context_line":"---"},{"line_number":2,"context_line":"fixes:"},{"line_number":3,"context_line":"  - |"},{"line_number":4,"context_line":"    When an aggregate is specified by ``member_of`` query parameter in"},{"line_number":5,"context_line":"    ``GET /allocation_candidates`` API, the providers directly"},{"line_number":6,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate and the providers whose root is"},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate should be in the candidates. However,"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_3369db8b","line":4,"range":{"start_line":4,"start_character":35,"end_line":4,"end_character":37},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_575a7881","updated":"2018-09-25 12:08:57.000000000","message":"Done","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":25625,"name":"Tetsuro Nakamura","email":"tetsuro.nakamura.bc@hco.ntt.co.jp","username":"tetsuro0907"},"change_message_id":"a045ce718382bf40c118f982320fb91143065e59","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":1,"context_line":"---"},{"line_number":2,"context_line":"fixes:"},{"line_number":3,"context_line":"  - |"},{"line_number":4,"context_line":"    When an aggregate is specified by ``member_of`` query parameter in"},{"line_number":5,"context_line":"    ``GET /allocation_candidates`` API, the providers directly"},{"line_number":6,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate and the providers whose root is"},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate should be in the candidates. However,"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_736f5393","line":4,"range":{"start_line":4,"start_character":68,"end_line":4,"end_character":70},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_b74aeca9","updated":"2018-09-25 12:08:57.000000000","message":"Done","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":14070,"name":"Eric Fried","email":"openstack@fried.cc","username":"efried"},"change_message_id":"e3b0179cc4f3381bcb4c7f01f6d48bf93343e103","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":2,"context_line":"fixes:"},{"line_number":3,"context_line":"  - |"},{"line_number":4,"context_line":"    When an aggregate is specified by ``member_of`` query parameter in"},{"line_number":5,"context_line":"    ``GET /allocation_candidates`` API, the providers directly"},{"line_number":6,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate and the providers whose root is"},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate should be in the candidates. However,"},{"line_number":8,"context_line":"    it filtered out the providers directly associated to the aggregate"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_37cc9c32","line":5,"range":{"start_line":5,"start_character":35,"end_line":5,"end_character":38},"updated":"2018-09-21 14:35:33.000000000","message":"operation","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":25625,"name":"Tetsuro Nakamura","email":"tetsuro.nakamura.bc@hco.ntt.co.jp","username":"tetsuro0907"},"change_message_id":"a045ce718382bf40c118f982320fb91143065e59","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":2,"context_line":"fixes:"},{"line_number":3,"context_line":"  - |"},{"line_number":4,"context_line":"    When an aggregate is specified by ``member_of`` query parameter in"},{"line_number":5,"context_line":"    ``GET /allocation_candidates`` API, the providers directly"},{"line_number":6,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate and the providers whose root is"},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate should be in the candidates. However,"},{"line_number":8,"context_line":"    it filtered out the providers directly associated to the aggregate"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_13613fa9","line":5,"range":{"start_line":5,"start_character":35,"end_line":5,"end_character":38},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_37cc9c32","updated":"2018-09-25 12:08:57.000000000","message":"Done","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":14070,"name":"Eric Fried","email":"openstack@fried.cc","username":"efried"},"change_message_id":"e3b0179cc4f3381bcb4c7f01f6d48bf93343e103","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":3,"context_line":"  - |"},{"line_number":4,"context_line":"    When an aggregate is specified by ``member_of`` query parameter in"},{"line_number":5,"context_line":"    ``GET /allocation_candidates`` API, the providers directly"},{"line_number":6,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate and the providers whose root is"},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate should be in the candidates. However,"},{"line_number":8,"context_line":"    it filtered out the providers directly associated to the aggregate"},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"    if its root is not in the aggregate. This release fixes the bug."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_17d5e0b6","line":6,"range":{"start_line":6,"start_character":15,"end_line":6,"end_character":17},"updated":"2018-09-21 14:35:33.000000000","message":"with","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":25625,"name":"Tetsuro Nakamura","email":"tetsuro.nakamura.bc@hco.ntt.co.jp","username":"tetsuro0907"},"change_message_id":"a045ce718382bf40c118f982320fb91143065e59","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":3,"context_line":"  - |"},{"line_number":4,"context_line":"    When an aggregate is specified by ``member_of`` query parameter in"},{"line_number":5,"context_line":"    ``GET /allocation_candidates`` API, the providers directly"},{"line_number":6,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate and the providers whose root is"},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate should be in the candidates. However,"},{"line_number":8,"context_line":"    it filtered out the providers directly associated to the aggregate"},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"    if its root is not in the aggregate. This release fixes the bug."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_f35b63f6","line":6,"range":{"start_line":6,"start_character":15,"end_line":6,"end_character":17},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_17d5e0b6","updated":"2018-09-25 12:08:57.000000000","message":"Done","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":14070,"name":"Eric Fried","email":"openstack@fried.cc","username":"efried"},"change_message_id":"e3b0179cc4f3381bcb4c7f01f6d48bf93343e103","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":4,"context_line":"    When an aggregate is specified by ``member_of`` query parameter in"},{"line_number":5,"context_line":"    ``GET /allocation_candidates`` API, the providers directly"},{"line_number":6,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate and the providers whose root is"},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate should be in the candidates. However,"},{"line_number":8,"context_line":"    it filtered out the providers directly associated to the aggregate"},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"    if its root is not in the aggregate. This release fixes the bug."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_b7df4cd5","line":7,"range":{"start_line":7,"start_character":15,"end_line":7,"end_character":17},"updated":"2018-09-21 14:35:33.000000000","message":"with","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":25625,"name":"Tetsuro Nakamura","email":"tetsuro.nakamura.bc@hco.ntt.co.jp","username":"tetsuro0907"},"change_message_id":"a045ce718382bf40c118f982320fb91143065e59","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":4,"context_line":"    When an aggregate is specified by ``member_of`` query parameter in"},{"line_number":5,"context_line":"    ``GET /allocation_candidates`` API, the providers directly"},{"line_number":6,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate and the providers whose root is"},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate should be in the candidates. However,"},{"line_number":8,"context_line":"    it filtered out the providers directly associated to the aggregate"},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"    if its root is not in the aggregate. This release fixes the bug."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_534d7739","line":7,"range":{"start_line":7,"start_character":15,"end_line":7,"end_character":17},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_b7df4cd5","updated":"2018-09-25 12:08:57.000000000","message":"Done","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":14070,"name":"Eric Fried","email":"openstack@fried.cc","username":"efried"},"change_message_id":"e3b0179cc4f3381bcb4c7f01f6d48bf93343e103","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":5,"context_line":"    ``GET /allocation_candidates`` API, the providers directly"},{"line_number":6,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate and the providers whose root is"},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate should be in the candidates. However,"},{"line_number":8,"context_line":"    it filtered out the providers directly associated to the aggregate"},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"    if its root is not in the aggregate. This release fixes the bug."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_774bf485","line":9,"range":{"start_line":8,"start_character":33,"end_line":9,"end_character":39},"updated":"2018-09-21 14:35:33.000000000","message":"Wait, this isn\u0027t right. Prior to this fix, if the child provider was in the aggregate, we would have included it, right? What\u0027s changed here is that, if the child was *not* in the aggregate, we would have excluded it.","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":14070,"name":"Eric Fried","email":"openstack@fried.cc","username":"efried"},"change_message_id":"e3b0179cc4f3381bcb4c7f01f6d48bf93343e103","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":6,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate and the providers whose root is"},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate should be in the candidates. However,"},{"line_number":8,"context_line":"    it filtered out the providers directly associated to the aggregate"},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"    if its root is not in the aggregate. This release fixes the bug."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_d74f6889","line":9,"range":{"start_line":9,"start_character":64,"end_line":9,"end_character":67},"updated":"2018-09-21 14:35:33.000000000","message":"should reference \u0026 link the bug number","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":14070,"name":"Eric Fried","email":"openstack@fried.cc","username":"efried"},"change_message_id":"f6c9fd8187f717bb4c2f6901e23bd3645e21eef2","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":5,"context_line":"    ``GET /allocation_candidates`` API, the providers directly"},{"line_number":6,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate and the providers whose root is"},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate should be in the candidates. However,"},{"line_number":8,"context_line":"    it filtered out the providers directly associated to the aggregate"},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"    if its root is not in the aggregate. This release fixes the bug."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_be460b22","line":9,"range":{"start_line":8,"start_character":33,"end_line":9,"end_character":39},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_73467325","updated":"2018-09-25 16:26:16.000000000","message":"\u003e So my question so far is that how did you come to the conclusion\n \u003e that there was the bug you mentioned at the PTG??\n\nYou\u0027re going to have to remind me what bug I mentioned at the PTG :)","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":25625,"name":"Tetsuro Nakamura","email":"tetsuro.nakamura.bc@hco.ntt.co.jp","username":"tetsuro0907"},"change_message_id":"a045ce718382bf40c118f982320fb91143065e59","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":5,"context_line":"    ``GET /allocation_candidates`` API, the providers directly"},{"line_number":6,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate and the providers whose root is"},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate should be in the candidates. However,"},{"line_number":8,"context_line":"    it filtered out the providers directly associated to the aggregate"},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"    if its root is not in the aggregate. This release fixes the bug."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_73467325","line":9,"range":{"start_line":8,"start_character":33,"end_line":9,"end_character":39},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_774bf485","updated":"2018-09-25 12:08:57.000000000","message":"Wait, no I don\u0027t think so. My thought is that the bug you mentioned in the PTG didn\u0027t exist in the first place. This is an another bug that I found when I tried to reproduce the bug you mentioned. I mean, I couldn\u0027t reproduce the bug you mentioned.\n\nSo my question so far is that how did you come to the conclusion that there was the bug you mentioned at the PTG??","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":25625,"name":"Tetsuro Nakamura","email":"tetsuro.nakamura.bc@hco.ntt.co.jp","username":"tetsuro0907"},"change_message_id":"a045ce718382bf40c118f982320fb91143065e59","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":6,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate and the providers whose root is"},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"    associated to the aggregate should be in the candidates. However,"},{"line_number":8,"context_line":"    it filtered out the providers directly associated to the aggregate"},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"    if its root is not in the aggregate. This release fixes the bug."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_3350fbd5","line":9,"range":{"start_line":9,"start_character":64,"end_line":9,"end_character":67},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_d74f6889","updated":"2018-09-25 12:08:57.000000000","message":"Done","commit_id":"e9e0d5ca57c34939c28fcf4fbf3cd9f6a4c117a8"},{"author":{"_account_id":11564,"name":"Chris Dent","email":"cdent@anticdent.org","username":"chdent"},"change_message_id":"3e363c8c7ae12d80ed6ef06b0ded4a436d7b34d6","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":6,"context_line":"    the non-root providers in the aggregate were excluded unless their"},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"    root provider was also in the aggregate. With this release, the"},{"line_number":8,"context_line":"    non-root providers directly associated with the aggregate are also"},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"    considered. See the `Bug#1792503`_ for details."},{"line_number":10,"context_line":""},{"line_number":11,"context_line":"    .. _Bug#1792503: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1792503"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":3,"id":"3f79a3b5_47c7b912","line":9,"updated":"2018-09-27 14:08:03.000000000","message":"This description doesn\u0027t quite work well in my brain. In part this is because I was thinking this was the fix for the member_of discussion we had in the blazar room at the PTG. But this is not that and I can\u0027t quite tease out what it actually is for.\n\nI\u0027m not sure, however, what to suggest.","commit_id":"c85ae69ee977fdea8cdef6aab0e8e563d2e0a803"},{"author":{"_account_id":25625,"name":"Tetsuro Nakamura","email":"tetsuro.nakamura.bc@hco.ntt.co.jp","username":"tetsuro0907"},"change_message_id":"f8ee8b4382bfa63e95525044dafbec97debfcdfd","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":6,"context_line":"    the non-root providers in the aggregate were excluded unless their"},{"line_number":7,"context_line":"    root provider was also in the aggregate. With this release, the"},{"line_number":8,"context_line":"    non-root providers directly associated with the aggregate are also"},{"line_number":9,"context_line":"    considered. See the `Bug#1792503`_ for details."},{"line_number":10,"context_line":""},{"line_number":11,"context_line":"    .. _Bug#1792503: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1792503"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":3,"id":"3f79a3b5_3745b915","line":9,"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_47c7b912","updated":"2018-10-02 01:29:41.000000000","message":"I can tell, because this describes a bug that is completely opposite to what is discussed in the PTG.\n\nWhen I tried to reproduce the bug; \"aggregates on a root doesn\u0027t span the whole tree\", I found the bug didn\u0027t exist and what I saw was  that \"aggregates on a root *did* span the whole tree _overwriting_ the aggregates on non-root rps in the tree\". As I thought _overwriting_ was not desirable since it _deletes_ the aggregate originally on non-roots in the first place. This patch fixes it to _add_ the aggregate on the root to non-root rps rather than _overwrite_ it.\n\nThis is a bit complex and that\u0027s why I started the document in a follow up. \n\nSimply speaking, I\u0027m pretty sure the bug we discussed in the PTG doesn\u0027t exist in the first place. Please forget about it.","commit_id":"c85ae69ee977fdea8cdef6aab0e8e563d2e0a803"}]}