)]}'
{"sushy/resources/system/system.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":10239,"name":"Dmitry Tantsur","email":"dtantsur@protonmail.com","username":"dtantsur"},"change_message_id":"dd7125eeaa55a2ebe9c9d96338ca6f2e852f897d","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":44,"context_line":""},{"line_number":45,"context_line":""},{"line_number":46,"context_line":"class BootField(base.CompositeField):"},{"line_number":47,"context_line":"    source_override_target_allowed_values \u003d base.Field("},{"line_number":48,"context_line":"        \u0027BootSourceOverrideTarget@Redfish.AllowableValues\u0027,"},{"line_number":49,"context_line":"        adapter\u003dlist)"},{"line_number":50,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"ff6d5bc8_5e0919e5","line":47,"updated":"2022-07-25 11:56:59.000000000","message":"This is a breaking change, is it worth it? If yes, we need a compatibility layer.\n\nI\u0027d skeep the source_override_ prefix in any case just like we do in other fields.","commit_id":"57c64f6a99a7528c990fe6ba976173e679c10f27"},{"author":{"_account_id":10239,"name":"Dmitry Tantsur","email":"dtantsur@protonmail.com","username":"dtantsur"},"change_message_id":"dd7125eeaa55a2ebe9c9d96338ca6f2e852f897d","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":288,"context_line":"            # We check if the value passed to the function is supported"},{"line_number":289,"context_line":"            # by comparing it to the allowed values."},{"line_number":290,"context_line":"            # If the parameter is not supported"},{"line_number":291,"context_line":"            # but set to CONTINUOUS we will set it to ONCE."},{"line_number":292,"context_line":"            # If ONCE is not supported"},{"line_number":293,"context_line":"            # we will throw an InvalidParameterValueError"},{"line_number":294,"context_line":"            allowed_values \u003d self.get_allowed_system_boot_enabled_values()"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"576f489b_741fb2f9","line":291,"updated":"2022-07-25 11:56:59.000000000","message":"Mmm, I don\u0027t feel well about silently changing the explicit user requested value to the opposite. Like, how is it going to work on reboots? I think it needs to be handled on the Ironic level.","commit_id":"57c64f6a99a7528c990fe6ba976173e679c10f27"},{"author":{"_account_id":11655,"name":"Julia Kreger","email":"juliaashleykreger@gmail.com","username":"jkreger","status":"Flying to the moon with a Jetpack!"},"change_message_id":"d5be2f8b28a7561439bf1ec3a0a69f6f657c63ff","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":288,"context_line":"            # We check if the value passed to the function is supported"},{"line_number":289,"context_line":"            # by comparing it to the allowed values."},{"line_number":290,"context_line":"            # If the parameter is not supported"},{"line_number":291,"context_line":"            # but set to CONTINUOUS we will set it to ONCE."},{"line_number":292,"context_line":"            # If ONCE is not supported"},{"line_number":293,"context_line":"            # we will throw an InvalidParameterValueError"},{"line_number":294,"context_line":"            allowed_values \u003d self.get_allowed_system_boot_enabled_values()"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"38502842_1a1cabe4","line":291,"in_reply_to":"576f489b_741fb2f9","updated":"2022-08-11 17:29:52.000000000","message":"I concur with dtantsur. I think we need to get an exception back to ironic and let ironic make the appropriate call because the underlying library interaction failed. The conundrum is that we shouldn\u0027t really be hiding the difference. *and* we really need someplace logging these things so logs can be used to understand what is going on when something unexpected happens. :(  there may be places where it is appropriate, there may be places where something else needs to be done with the overall workflow.","commit_id":"57c64f6a99a7528c990fe6ba976173e679c10f27"},{"author":{"_account_id":10239,"name":"Dmitry Tantsur","email":"dtantsur@protonmail.com","username":"dtantsur"},"change_message_id":"9ecdf863bb853031ca3ee52ba000c28ec1a77e11","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":48,"context_line":"        \u0027BootSourceOverrideTarget@Redfish.AllowableValues\u0027,"},{"line_number":49,"context_line":"        adapter\u003dlist)"},{"line_number":50,"context_line":""},{"line_number":51,"context_line":"    source_override_enabled_allowed_values \u003d base.Field("},{"line_number":52,"context_line":"        \u0027BootSourceOverrideEnabled@Redfish.AllowableValues\u0027,"},{"line_number":53,"context_line":"        adapter\u003dlist)"},{"line_number":54,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":4,"id":"f0d6a630_f04a9a9a","line":51,"updated":"2022-10-31 16:40:23.000000000","message":"We call the field \"enabled\", maybe call this \"enabled_allowed_values\"? otherwise they\u0027re inconsistent (I wish we used target_allowed_values above..)","commit_id":"7aee697995330d786449df742da66c115a21fc87"}]}