)]}'
{"doc/specs/in-progress/task_verification_levels.rst":[{"author":{"_account_id":19587,"name":"Joshua White","email":"joshua.l.white@intel.com","username":"jwhite"},"change_message_id":"03fc2e13ecb2cfbc4ccc3ac8920d9a16dc9b8e21","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":24,"context_line":"Problem description"},{"line_number":25,"context_line":"\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d\u003d"},{"line_number":26,"context_line":""},{"line_number":27,"context_line":"Currently Rally verification requires admin user for all tasks, even those"},{"line_number":28,"context_line":"that do not actually require an admin.  All validators will accept user"},{"line_number":29,"context_line":"and admin credentials and sometimes use them, sometimes not. This produces"},{"line_number":30,"context_line":"a lot of issues:"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":5,"id":"1a95cdbc_22123663","line":27,"range":{"start_line":27,"start_character":37,"end_line":27,"end_character":38},"updated":"2016-10-04 21:27:46.000000000","message":"requires an admin user","commit_id":"820e37e7e7e6055298e5bbece167b66e8a7f4c2e"},{"author":{"_account_id":9545,"name":"Andriy Kurilin","email":"andr.kurilin@gmail.com","username":"akurilin"},"change_message_id":"e16882a35c0e43dbac0580c6ce5db72846588c16","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":51,"context_line":"Secondly, we need a way to mark a task as \"requires-admin\" since there are"},{"line_number":52,"context_line":"tasks which can\u0027t be run unless provided an admin user:"},{"line_number":53,"context_line":""},{"line_number":54,"context_line":"* new optional attribute"},{"line_number":55,"context_line":"  Add a new, optional attribute to the task to indicate that it requires a"},{"line_number":56,"context_line":"  user with admin role, then add code in the validation to handle this new"},{"line_number":57,"context_line":"  attribute."},{"line_number":58,"context_line":"* backwards compatibility"},{"line_number":59,"context_line":"  if a task doesn\u0027t have the requires-admin attribute, then default to"},{"line_number":60,"context_line":"  requires-admin\u003dtrue to maintain backwards compatibility."},{"line_number":61,"context_line":""},{"line_number":62,"context_line":""},{"line_number":63,"context_line":"Alternatives"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":7,"id":"1a95cdbc_6b7e8daf","line":60,"range":{"start_line":54,"start_character":0,"end_line":60,"end_character":58},"updated":"2016-10-06 10:57:28.000000000","message":"Rally has \"required_openstack\" validator[1]. Which was designed to specify what scenario requires. So there is no reason to add one more entity.\n\nCurrently, rvasilets works on validators refactoring[2][3]. It will allow to obtain admin/user information like:\n\n    validators \u003d scenario_obj._meta_get(\"validators_v2\", [])\n    required_openstack_val \u003d [v for v in validators if v[0] \u003d\u003d \"required_openstack\"]\n    if required_openstack_val:\n         requires_admin \u003d required_openstack_val[0][1].get([\"admin\"], True)\n         requires_users \u003d required_openstack_val[0][1].get([\"users\"], True)\n\nAlso, this patch adds ability to use validators with contexts.\n\nAfter this work will be finished, we will need to  port all existing validators to new style, rework them, rework several context to support non-admin users.\n\nIf you want to help with this big task, please let me know and we will talk with rvasilets about his progress and how we can split the work.\n\n[1] - https://github.com/openstack/rally/blob/master/rally/task/validation.py#L596-L607\n[2] - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/346109/\n[3] - https://github.com/openstack/rally/blob/master/doc/specs/in-progress/pluggable_validators.rst","commit_id":"ba83ec6d5f3784813de43b4d9343746b761081f6"},{"author":{"_account_id":9234,"name":"Steve Heyman","email":"steve@heyman.com","username":"hockeynut"},"change_message_id":"d90ebb29f05541018bfd4fccaae9b65032952b3e","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":51,"context_line":"Secondly, we need a way to mark a task as \"requires-admin\" since there are"},{"line_number":52,"context_line":"tasks which can\u0027t be run unless provided an admin user:"},{"line_number":53,"context_line":""},{"line_number":54,"context_line":"* new optional attribute"},{"line_number":55,"context_line":"  Add a new, optional attribute to the task to indicate that it requires a"},{"line_number":56,"context_line":"  user with admin role, then add code in the validation to handle this new"},{"line_number":57,"context_line":"  attribute."},{"line_number":58,"context_line":"* backwards compatibility"},{"line_number":59,"context_line":"  if a task doesn\u0027t have the requires-admin attribute, then default to"},{"line_number":60,"context_line":"  requires-admin\u003dtrue to maintain backwards compatibility."},{"line_number":61,"context_line":""},{"line_number":62,"context_line":""},{"line_number":63,"context_line":"Alternatives"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":7,"id":"fa6399be_0f0484c4","line":60,"range":{"start_line":54,"start_character":0,"end_line":60,"end_character":58},"in_reply_to":"1a95cdbc_6b7e8daf","updated":"2016-10-18 00:18:53.000000000","message":"Thanks Andrey!  I would love to help out here.  Seems like this BP can be abandoned as the functionality is going to be available in the work items you linked above?","commit_id":"ba83ec6d5f3784813de43b4d9343746b761081f6"}]}