)]}'
{"/PATCHSET_LEVEL":[{"author":{"_account_id":11604,"name":"sean mooney","email":"smooney@redhat.com","username":"sean-k-mooney"},"change_message_id":"a32597041030323f661d265cea113dd1b66c5521","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"b826774b_fe1535f8","updated":"2024-09-18 23:05:55.000000000","message":"i disagree with this as we have now blocked including them and made testing harder\n\ni too the previous approch so we coudl simply have a dnm patch against the bot propsoed bump to get extra test coverage.\n\nnow we need to explcity remove this pin instad of just not mergeing the broken releases.\n\nso this is very much not how we shoudld be doing this form my view.","commit_id":"dc918085516d6f7b47430ea14934493eef1ba748"},{"author":{"_account_id":11604,"name":"sean mooney","email":"smooney@redhat.com","username":"sean-k-mooney"},"change_message_id":"bb140f6ae9c4a8fad996e4c36b3cc54f1b5009a5","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"37901426_52107a68","updated":"2024-09-19 00:04:19.000000000","message":"it does that but it alos prevents tox -e generate form creating a patch that will pull in the new verison meanign the osc team will have to manually propose the bump\ninstaead of -1ing the bot patch.\n\neven with out my devstack pathch its possible to have a DNM change form a project against the requiremets patch to get extra ci coverage before it merged but if the patch is never propesed by the both then someone has to manually create the requriements bump patch to be able to test with the new release in that case.","commit_id":"dc918085516d6f7b47430ea14934493eef1ba748"},{"author":{"_account_id":11604,"name":"sean mooney","email":"smooney@redhat.com","username":"sean-k-mooney"},"change_message_id":"0c19d81fe53d8ed5c4cb482ea73bf029ac6da1b2","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"c45395b2_44017748","in_reply_to":"b826774b_fe1535f8","updated":"2024-09-18 23:13:02.000000000","message":"by the way i tough we had more extiensivne doc stateing we shoudl prefer masking broken release over caps\n\nhttps://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/dependency-management.html#global-requirements\n\n\"\"\"\nThese should be few and far between on stable branches, mainly masking known bad versions or in extreme adding a maximum version allowable for a package.\n\"\"\"\n\ni know there was a strong dislike of havign caps for many years.\nevidently this has lessened but i still think we shoudl prefer masking the know broken verison over a hard cap in situration like this.","commit_id":"dc918085516d6f7b47430ea14934493eef1ba748"}],"global-requirements.txt":[{"author":{"_account_id":5263,"name":"Jeremy Stanley","display_name":"fungi","email":"fungi@yuggoth.org","username":"fungi","status":"missing, presumed fed"},"change_message_id":"0b71c29e67ce6ca73ca856d9bb09841cce059150","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":425,"context_line":"python-observabilityclient  # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":426,"context_line":"python-octaviaclient  # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":427,"context_line":"# FIXME: Temporary cap to unblock nova during 2024.2 release. Remove asap."},{"line_number":428,"context_line":"python-openstackclient\u003c7.0.0  # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":429,"context_line":"python-swiftclient  # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":430,"context_line":"python-tackerclient  # Apache-2.0"},{"line_number":431,"context_line":"python-troveclient  # Apache-2.0"}],"source_content_type":"text/plain","patch_set":1,"id":"dccebd65_3142581d","line":428,"updated":"2024-09-18 19:17:35.000000000","message":"Actually, \u0027\u003c7\u0027 is sufficient, but this is also fine and ideally very temporary anyway.","commit_id":"dc918085516d6f7b47430ea14934493eef1ba748"}]}