)]}'
{"/PATCHSET_LEVEL":[{"author":{"_account_id":23851,"name":"Riccardo Pittau","email":"elfosardo@gmail.com","username":"elfosardo"},"change_message_id":"2dd6f0304ca612fd02e58cad2198aa99b7d002a6","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"4aeaf19b_6ffb9328","updated":"2025-04-07 16:42:11.000000000","message":"This is to fix the issue the change that was introduced in cliff 4.9.1 AFTER the clients were released, without this fix, compiling the clients is impossible unless the tests are disabled or patched. When the clients were released the tests were working fine, then cliff was bumped to 4.9.1 in constraints and broke them, and we could not add the test fixes to the release because of release timeline, so I guess this release should be allowed.","commit_id":"a93d90a65b4f054349ffafdac0a310dedafd11c2"},{"author":{"_account_id":17685,"name":"Elod Illes","email":"elod.illes@est.tech","username":"elod.illes"},"change_message_id":"af42d87c33cdb5f22a1bcb796326044548d0d690","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"3109c7be_aa82a5d6","updated":"2025-04-07 10:56:16.000000000","message":"as I wrote on IRC i\u0027m not sure this worth a release at all as this contains only non-functional code changes [1]. (Well, as I understand it contains a gate fix as tests are failing without the patch \u0027Fix bare metal info order in unit tests\u0027.)\n\n[1] $ git log --oneline 5.3.0..HEAD --no-merges \nf996802 Fix bare metal info order in unit tests\n6623192 Update TOX_CONSTRAINTS_FILE for stable/2025.1\n06bafff Update .gitreview for stable/2025.1","commit_id":"a93d90a65b4f054349ffafdac0a310dedafd11c2"},{"author":{"_account_id":17685,"name":"Elod Illes","email":"elod.illes@est.tech","username":"elod.illes"},"change_message_id":"597a7d7407ec84cbd994f137efeaae1b438b82c7","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"654fa94e_8d8628e1","in_reply_to":"4aeaf19b_6ffb9328","updated":"2025-04-08 09:05:29.000000000","message":"thanks for the explanation Riccardo. ACK, I accept the team\u0027s decision, though i\u0027m still not convinced that a package that contains no functional code change is beneficial for operators. (I do understand that tests are failing without the test fix in this release and that is needed for some packager systems)","commit_id":"a93d90a65b4f054349ffafdac0a310dedafd11c2"}]}