)]}'
{"/COMMIT_MSG":[{"author":{"_account_id":8122,"name":"Cyril Roelandt","email":"cyril@redhat.com","username":"cyril.roelandt.enovance"},"change_message_id":"d096c78dd43f62e01659deb6542974bd5db96715","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":10,"context_line":"disable a single check, which was not possible before. This new approach"},{"line_number":11,"context_line":"allows to enable new tests more easily and see which checks are"},{"line_number":12,"context_line":"currently disabled."},{"line_number":13,"context_line":""},{"line_number":14,"context_line":"This change allows to use pbr 1.0 and newer which is required to support"},{"line_number":15,"context_line":"Python 3. Previously, hacking 0.8.1 was used, but hacking 0.8 is"},{"line_number":16,"context_line":"incompatible with pbr 1.0 and newer: hacking 0.8 requires pbr\u003c1.0."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":5,"id":"3a50d1a3_62d9c456","line":13,"updated":"2015-07-28 15:38:12.000000000","message":"It allows *someone/something* to do something","commit_id":"30544fc87328eba7668963723149c785528908ee"},{"author":{"_account_id":8122,"name":"Cyril Roelandt","email":"cyril@redhat.com","username":"cyril.roelandt.enovance"},"change_message_id":"d096c78dd43f62e01659deb6542974bd5db96715","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":11,"context_line":"allows to enable new tests more easily and see which checks are"},{"line_number":12,"context_line":"currently disabled."},{"line_number":13,"context_line":""},{"line_number":14,"context_line":"This change allows to use pbr 1.0 and newer which is required to support"},{"line_number":15,"context_line":"Python 3. Previously, hacking 0.8.1 was used, but hacking 0.8 is"},{"line_number":16,"context_line":"incompatible with pbr 1.0 and newer: hacking 0.8 requires pbr\u003c1.0."},{"line_number":17,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":5,"id":"3a50d1a3_82ee50eb","line":14,"updated":"2015-07-28 15:38:12.000000000","message":"ditto","commit_id":"30544fc87328eba7668963723149c785528908ee"},{"author":{"_account_id":8122,"name":"Cyril Roelandt","email":"cyril@redhat.com","username":"cyril.roelandt.enovance"},"change_message_id":"d096c78dd43f62e01659deb6542974bd5db96715","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":16,"context_line":"incompatible with pbr 1.0 and newer: hacking 0.8 requires pbr\u003c1.0."},{"line_number":17,"context_line":""},{"line_number":18,"context_line":"Fix also E251 warnings (\"unexpected spaces around keyword / parameter"},{"line_number":19,"context_line":"equals\") in tempauth.py, because the check became more strict."},{"line_number":20,"context_line":""},{"line_number":21,"context_line":"Change-Id: I41d63b9467083d7606ad18aaa398ca7738b27fae"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":5,"id":"3a50d1a3_42bb68e5","line":19,"updated":"2015-07-28 15:38:12.000000000","message":"stricter","commit_id":"30544fc87328eba7668963723149c785528908ee"}],"tox.ini":[{"author":{"_account_id":330,"name":"John Dickinson","email":"me@not.mn","username":"notmyname"},"change_message_id":"5e04987d97d861df7ed10f4c4e04bdd20b23974a","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":53,"context_line":"# it\u0027s not a bug that we aren\u0027t using all of hacking, ignore:"},{"line_number":54,"context_line":"# F812: list comprehension redefines ..."},{"line_number":55,"context_line":"# H*"},{"line_number":56,"context_line":"ignore \u003d F812,H"},{"line_number":57,"context_line":"exclude \u003d .venv,.tox,dist,doc,*egg"},{"line_number":58,"context_line":"show-source \u003d True"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-properties","patch_set":2,"id":"3a50d1a3_14cab36e","line":56,"updated":"2015-07-27 16:23:09.000000000","message":"The intention with the current version of the code is to only test the selected tests and ignore all the others. My initial reading here seems to imply that we\u0027re losing that.","commit_id":"2ef6e4ca0e83be837ba97945a4a9e93e09468837"},{"author":{"_account_id":9107,"name":"Victor Stinner","email":"vstinner@redhat.com","username":"haypo"},"change_message_id":"ef9009484e9c69eb7f2005e932a4ba574be8a70b","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":53,"context_line":"# it\u0027s not a bug that we aren\u0027t using all of hacking, ignore:"},{"line_number":54,"context_line":"# F812: list comprehension redefines ..."},{"line_number":55,"context_line":"# H*"},{"line_number":56,"context_line":"ignore \u003d F812,H"},{"line_number":57,"context_line":"exclude \u003d .venv,.tox,dist,doc,*egg"},{"line_number":58,"context_line":"show-source \u003d True"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-properties","patch_set":2,"id":"3a50d1a3_e73afbcc","line":56,"in_reply_to":"3a50d1a3_14cab36e","updated":"2015-07-27 16:34:16.000000000","message":"Currently, the \"ignore\" option is currently ignored by flake8.\n\nI read the source code of flake8 (pep8 in fact): it doesn\u0027t look possible to ignore a test if the select option is used :-(\n\nhttps://github.com/PyCQA/pep8/blob/d48eef071003952ed0f98445dc3dc6bc29618f9c/pep8.py#L1808\n\nWith this patch serie, there are only 3 remaining warnings, all in the category F812. IMHO these warnings are more annoying than useful, so I want to disable them. I can fix it if you prefer.\n\nThis change ignores all Hxxx warnings, because the list of ignored Hxxx tests looks very long. I can enhance my patch to keep the same behaviour than before: ignore all Hxxx warnings except of H102,H103,H201,H231,H501,H903.\n\nI want to enable more Hxxx warnings. See for example this change to fix the \"assert_ deprecation\" warning:\nhttps://review.openstack.org/#/c/206031/\n\nI can work on more patches if you accept my changes.","commit_id":"2ef6e4ca0e83be837ba97945a4a9e93e09468837"},{"author":{"_account_id":7847,"name":"Alistair Coles","email":"alistairncoles@gmail.com","username":"acoles"},"change_message_id":"c88be7652a81d5463bee2bf42550d63af97cf9df","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":76,"context_line":"# H501: Do not use self.__dict__ for string formatting"},{"line_number":77,"context_line":"# H702: Formatting operation should be outside of localization method call"},{"line_number":78,"context_line":"# H703: Multiple positional placeholders"},{"line_number":79,"context_line":"ignore \u003d E113,E121,E122,E123,E126,E128,E251,E265,F402,F812,H101,H202,H232,H233,H234,H235,H301,H306,H401,H403,H404,H405,H501,H702,H703"},{"line_number":80,"context_line":"exclude \u003d .venv,.tox,dist,doc,*egg"},{"line_number":81,"context_line":"show-source \u003d True"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-properties","patch_set":4,"id":"3a50d1a3_ca9b2217","line":79,"updated":"2015-07-28 10:56:17.000000000","message":"Previously we selected all Exxx, but here we ignore some - isn\u0027t that a backwards step?\n\nAlso there are Hxxx that we previously did not select (E.g. H402) that are now not ignored, but curiously do not show errors with this patch, but do with the older version of hacking. That confuses me.","commit_id":"9dec3fa1237777b518b0aa8529cef064bd186bc2"},{"author":{"_account_id":9107,"name":"Victor Stinner","email":"vstinner@redhat.com","username":"haypo"},"change_message_id":"e8be1c8b97d571db8d57e0f6fc0561c3591b6d89","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":76,"context_line":"# H501: Do not use self.__dict__ for string formatting"},{"line_number":77,"context_line":"# H702: Formatting operation should be outside of localization method call"},{"line_number":78,"context_line":"# H703: Multiple positional placeholders"},{"line_number":79,"context_line":"ignore \u003d E113,E121,E122,E123,E126,E128,E251,E265,F402,F812,H101,H202,H232,H233,H234,H235,H301,H306,H401,H403,H404,H405,H501,H702,H703"},{"line_number":80,"context_line":"exclude \u003d .venv,.tox,dist,doc,*egg"},{"line_number":81,"context_line":"show-source \u003d True"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-properties","patch_set":4,"id":"3a50d1a3_53f6ea5d","line":79,"in_reply_to":"3a50d1a3_ca9b2217","updated":"2015-07-28 11:42:11.000000000","message":"\u003e Previously we selected all Exxx, but here we ignore some - isn\u0027t that a backwards step?\n\nUpgrading hacking 0.8 to 0.10 adds many *new* checks. To be able to work with incremental changes, I propose to first disable them and then I will propose patches to fix warnings on these new checks.\n\nI already wrote some patches:\n\n* https://review.openstack.org/206149 - Fix hacking H232 warnings (octal)\n* https://review.openstack.org/206150 - Fix hacking H403 warnings (docstrings)\n* https://review.openstack.org/205966 - Don\u0027t format using self.__dict__\n* https://review.openstack.org/205964 - Fix warnings of hacking 0.10.2\n* https://review.openstack.org/206031 - Replace deprecated assert_()\n\nI reworked my patch serie to put the patch upgrading hacking to 0.10 as the first patch. So following patches can enable a check when they fix warnings of the check, to avoid regressions.\n\n\u003e Also there are Hxxx that we previously did not select (E.g. H402) that are now not ignored, but curiously do not show errors with this patch,\n\nI chose to enable new checks when they don\u0027t make \"tox -e pep8\" to fail (when Swift has no error for these checks).\n\n\u003e ... but do with the older version of hacking. That confuses me.\n\nI ran flake8 in the master branch with hacking 0.8: I agree that many H402 warnings are emitted.\n\nIn fact, H402 was more annoying than really useful and it was simply removed: see the change I9426644fa708e9d5563abe04dc4ad656dbeb3656.","commit_id":"9dec3fa1237777b518b0aa8529cef064bd186bc2"}]}