)]}'
{"/PATCHSET_LEVEL":[{"author":{"_account_id":17685,"name":"Elod Illes","email":"elod.illes@est.tech","username":"elod.illes"},"change_message_id":"a7c65a1f259cfccd4bb9ae8197fcd953f9692b8d","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"60b955d8_378c5c82","updated":"2026-09-02 12:05:51.000000000","message":"i don\u0027t want to block this really, but the reno mentions behaviour change and CVE fixes, so I think MINOR versions should have been bumped on all 3 branches. (if there isn\u0027t any serious reason to bump only PATCH version...)\nGiving -1 to highlight my comment.","commit_id":"9f2c0b09beca4a2c47ff98f6a0dfd1e914546a97"},{"author":{"_account_id":27900,"name":"Artem Goncharov","email":"artem.goncharov@gmail.com","username":"gtema"},"change_message_id":"67b89626e8644efed31162aaf4095569b9601341","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"c289432e_481304a0","updated":"2026-09-03 09:16:37.000000000","message":"the not landed change to 2026.1 is fixed (tests were failing) and is not in the gate. I will update the hash once it merges","commit_id":"9f2c0b09beca4a2c47ff98f6a0dfd1e914546a97"},{"author":{"_account_id":16643,"name":"Goutham Pacha Ravi","email":"gouthampravi@gmail.com","username":"gouthamr"},"change_message_id":"b55f90a215d31d06e15fe0b9933c4ad171a87786","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"ae9d46b1_b7ea377a","in_reply_to":"2ab30ddc_cccd94ad","updated":"2026-09-03 06:03:58.000000000","message":"Hey Elod, \n\nGenerally, security releases just bump the patch portion in the semver (unless there was a feature-like fix - but most security bug fixes are meant to be patching holes with backwards compatibility to all supported behavior). \n\nHowever your question brought my attention to additional fixes that have landed beyond the CVE fixes. One of these is a regression. We can\u0027t release stable/2026.1 right now, because it doesn\u0027t have another public security fix that the team has merged into stable/2025.2 and stable/2025.1 [1]\n\nI\u0027m checking with the team, and will get back to this. \n\n\n[1] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/keystone/+/1002082","commit_id":"9f2c0b09beca4a2c47ff98f6a0dfd1e914546a97"},{"author":{"_account_id":16643,"name":"Goutham Pacha Ravi","email":"gouthampravi@gmail.com","username":"gouthamr"},"change_message_id":"a81d2b0b9718b14e0209dbdedfa540b0d9dc4422","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"4d48ee79_368b4491","in_reply_to":"2d851a00_756f14d9","updated":"2026-09-03 17:32:33.000000000","message":"@elod.illes@est.tech: We discussed this some more on #openstack-security [1] I\u0027ve bumped the minor version to accommodate the changes that are coming in. The significant commits bring config opts and they don\u0027t preserve backwards compatibility to-the-letter. In our interpretation, all regular OpenStack deployments must be okay on upgrade; but there may be some non-standard deployments out there that may care about these fixes and want to upgrade, but, they\u0027ll have to tinker with these newly introduced options to not break any use cases they have. \n\n[1] https://meetings.opendev.org/irclogs/%23openstack-security/%23openstack-security.2026-09-03.log.html#openstack-security.2026-09-03.log.html#t2026-09-03T17:05:00","commit_id":"9f2c0b09beca4a2c47ff98f6a0dfd1e914546a97"},{"author":{"_account_id":17685,"name":"Elod Illes","email":"elod.illes@est.tech","username":"elod.illes"},"change_message_id":"4bca5759c716008b648abb93b5fe93999903f901","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"89d70adf_344869cc","in_reply_to":"4d48ee79_368b4491","updated":"2026-09-03 18:28:52.000000000","message":"ACK, thanks for the bump and for the explanation as well! +2","commit_id":"9f2c0b09beca4a2c47ff98f6a0dfd1e914546a97"},{"author":{"_account_id":17685,"name":"Elod Illes","email":"elod.illes@est.tech","username":"elod.illes"},"change_message_id":"2efa06c5f3756e75a5e8abebbb79d33943f6f260","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"2ab30ddc_cccd94ad","in_reply_to":"60b955d8_378c5c82","updated":"2026-09-02 12:06:12.000000000","message":"reno: https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/build/b0a1b92f8ea24f2da4402c3f1953183a/log/tox/list-changes/list-changes-results.log#611","commit_id":"9f2c0b09beca4a2c47ff98f6a0dfd1e914546a97"},{"author":{"_account_id":17685,"name":"Elod Illes","email":"elod.illes@est.tech","username":"elod.illes"},"change_message_id":"9a692bccf92930a7ff49bbcf4d450a6d06072dc3","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"2d851a00_756f14d9","in_reply_to":"ae9d46b1_b7ea377a","updated":"2026-09-03 08:30:43.000000000","message":"ACK, thanks Goutham for taking care of these releases!\n\n(note: we *mostly* follow semver, but there are exceptions o:) e.g. some teams like to highlight important security fixes with MINOR version bump. in this case i was thinking about the amount of CVE fix notes and the behaviour change (which should be avoided based on stable policy, as that could cause issues when deployers upgrade their environmnents. but of course, this is another exception, as CVE fixes sometimes require such changes o:)) justify the MINOR bump. I\u0027m not insisting to bump minor version, just wanted to note that IMHO that matches better than patch bump :))","commit_id":"9f2c0b09beca4a2c47ff98f6a0dfd1e914546a97"},{"author":{"_account_id":17685,"name":"Elod Illes","email":"elod.illes@est.tech","username":"elod.illes"},"change_message_id":"4bca5759c716008b648abb93b5fe93999903f901","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":3,"id":"24446df1_0e38b531","updated":"2026-09-03 18:28:52.000000000","message":"Thanks everyone, LGTM, too!","commit_id":"681eba6b340d645efae2e00165417cbc55ca4717"}]}