)]}'
{"swift/common/utils.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":6198,"name":"Peter Portante","email":"peter.a.portante@gmail.com","username":"peter-a-portante"},"change_message_id":"472aa7ccf5919e0076c1da71cd70406011ffa526","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":1622,"context_line":"        Spawn a job in a green thread on the pile."},{"line_number":1623,"context_line":"        \"\"\""},{"line_number":1624,"context_line":"        self._pool.spawn(self._run_func, func, args, kwargs)"},{"line_number":1625,"context_line":"        self._inflight +\u003d 1"},{"line_number":1626,"context_line":""},{"line_number":1627,"context_line":"    def __iter__(self):"},{"line_number":1628,"context_line":"        return self"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"AAAATn%2F%2FbZ0%3D","line":1625,"updated":"2013-11-06 11:36:22.000000000","message":"Should this be incremented before calling spawn?","commit_id":"5202344d63dd6c94f5914449e8a56d48f5a3b388"}],"swift/proxy/controllers/base.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":6198,"name":"Peter Portante","email":"peter.a.portante@gmail.com","username":"peter-a-portante"},"change_message_id":"828d1aadf7e2c5c66b0de760129c09d55d5f026c","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":895,"context_line":"                    [s for s in statuses if hundred \u003c\u003d s \u003c hundred + 100]"},{"line_number":896,"context_line":"                if len(hstatuses) \u003e\u003d quorum_size(len(statuses)):"},{"line_number":897,"context_line":"                    status \u003d max(hstatuses)"},{"line_number":898,"context_line":"                    status_index \u003d statuses.index(status)"},{"line_number":899,"context_line":"                    resp.status \u003d \u0027%s %s\u0027 % (status, reasons[status_index])"},{"line_number":900,"context_line":"                    resp.body \u003d bodies[status_index]"},{"line_number":901,"context_line":"                    if headers:"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"AAAATn%2F%2FYbE%3D","line":898,"updated":"2013-11-07 17:06:06.000000000","message":"Curiosity: if the list of statuses has more than one listed with the same status, won\u0027t the index be potentially the wrong one for line 899 and/or line 902 below?","commit_id":"f0c0855ec8207fa8be63ed4f3135c8e29a31acc0"},{"author":{"_account_id":1216,"name":"gholt","email":"z-launchpad@brim.net","username":"gholt"},"change_message_id":"aed417919ffa328692d75c024ad95d7c6366dcf0","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":895,"context_line":"                    [s for s in statuses if hundred \u003c\u003d s \u003c hundred + 100]"},{"line_number":896,"context_line":"                if len(hstatuses) \u003e\u003d quorum_size(len(statuses)):"},{"line_number":897,"context_line":"                    status \u003d max(hstatuses)"},{"line_number":898,"context_line":"                    status_index \u003d statuses.index(status)"},{"line_number":899,"context_line":"                    resp.status \u003d \u0027%s %s\u0027 % (status, reasons[status_index])"},{"line_number":900,"context_line":"                    resp.body \u003d bodies[status_index]"},{"line_number":901,"context_line":"                    if headers:"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"AAAATn%2F%2FX9o%3D","line":898,"in_reply_to":"AAAATn%2F%2FYbE%3D","updated":"2013-11-07 23:00:33.000000000","message":"Both are equally as right/wrong, so it shouldn\u0027t matter which you pick.","commit_id":"f0c0855ec8207fa8be63ed4f3135c8e29a31acc0"}],"swift/proxy/controllers/obj.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":6198,"name":"Peter Portante","email":"peter.a.portante@gmail.com","username":"peter-a-portante"},"change_message_id":"6beaa6e8b54d5c05591656cde6432b30a07d34a6","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":848,"context_line":"                self.exception_occurred(node, _(\u0027Object\u0027),"},{"line_number":849,"context_line":"                                        _(\u0027Expect: 100-continue on %s\u0027) % path)"},{"line_number":850,"context_line":""},{"line_number":851,"context_line":"    def _get_put_responses(self, req, conns, nodes):"},{"line_number":852,"context_line":"        statuses \u003d []"},{"line_number":853,"context_line":"        reasons \u003d []"},{"line_number":854,"context_line":"        bodies \u003d []"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"AAAATn%2F%2FYb4%3D","line":851,"updated":"2013-11-07 17:03:56.000000000","message":"The first argument here is \"req\", but it is only used for error handling and at that, it only needs the path argument. Could we rename this to req_path (or something), and make it the last argument to the method since this is only for error reporting?\n\nAlso, can nodes be rename to max_responses or something, since we only ever use the len(nodes) in this method?\n\nAnd finally, could we get a test written just for this method to make sure it gets 100% covered? If that is not reasonable, perhaps we could enhance existing tests to ensure it is 100% covered?","commit_id":"f0c0855ec8207fa8be63ed4f3135c8e29a31acc0"},{"author":{"_account_id":1216,"name":"gholt","email":"z-launchpad@brim.net","username":"gholt"},"change_message_id":"aed417919ffa328692d75c024ad95d7c6366dcf0","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":848,"context_line":"                self.exception_occurred(node, _(\u0027Object\u0027),"},{"line_number":849,"context_line":"                                        _(\u0027Expect: 100-continue on %s\u0027) % path)"},{"line_number":850,"context_line":""},{"line_number":851,"context_line":"    def _get_put_responses(self, req, conns, nodes):"},{"line_number":852,"context_line":"        statuses \u003d []"},{"line_number":853,"context_line":"        reasons \u003d []"},{"line_number":854,"context_line":"        bodies \u003d []"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"AAAATn%2F%2FX9E%3D","line":851,"in_reply_to":"AAAATn%2F%2FYb4%3D","updated":"2013-11-07 23:00:33.000000000","message":"I\u0027m not particular on all the var naming and such; can always refactor if need be or if it just makes things cleaner/clearer to most folks.\n\nThe test coverage seems to be missing a couple of the exceptional conditions, but it\u0027s mostly covered and doesn\u0027t seem to be worse off than it was before.\n\nMore tests can always be added, of course, but I don\u0027t want to hold this up just for that.","commit_id":"f0c0855ec8207fa8be63ed4f3135c8e29a31acc0"}]}