)]}'
{"/PATCHSET_LEVEL":[{"author":{"_account_id":38496,"name":"Andressa Cabistani","display_name":"Andressa","email":"acabistani@gmail.com","username":"andressadotpy","status":"I\u0027m a Software Engineer at Red Hat and I love Open Source and connect with people! Feel free to DM through IRC, I\u0027ll be delighted to chat"},"change_message_id":"d01289863bad730c6091eaee164a4ecf6423ef33","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"7256ec00_9ddbbc46","updated":"2026-08-05 10:39:01.000000000","message":"I added a small question just to make sure the behaviour is correct but it already looks good to me","commit_id":"2cf8c8e1b6cfca3dd35807edfca81a9a08d72b8d"}],"swift/container/mpu_auditor.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":38496,"name":"Andressa Cabistani","display_name":"Andressa","email":"acabistani@gmail.com","username":"andressadotpy","status":"I\u0027m a Software Engineer at Red Hat and I love Open Source and connect with people! Feel free to DM through IRC, I\u0027ll be delighted to chat"},"change_message_id":"d01289863bad730c6091eaee164a4ecf6423ef33","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":328,"context_line":"        return metadata.get(MPU_SYSMETA_UPLOAD_ID_KEY) \u003d\u003d obj_ref.obj_id"},{"line_number":329,"context_line":""},{"line_number":330,"context_line":"    def _delete_session(self, session):"},{"line_number":331,"context_line":"        self.client.delete_object(self.broker.account,"},{"line_number":332,"context_line":"                                  self.broker.container,"},{"line_number":333,"context_line":"                                  session.name)"},{"line_number":334,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"6850cb4e_5926670f","line":331,"updated":"2026-08-05 10:39:01.000000000","message":"Question: why Why does `_delete_session()` still uses self.broker.account but `_audit_aborted_session()` is using self.hidden_account?","commit_id":"2cf8c8e1b6cfca3dd35807edfca81a9a08d72b8d"},{"author":{"_account_id":7847,"name":"Alistair Coles","email":"alistairncoles@gmail.com","username":"acoles"},"change_message_id":"1a34f1393fcd4e399d1b49eaf53a62a1ff9e1afd","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":328,"context_line":"        return metadata.get(MPU_SYSMETA_UPLOAD_ID_KEY) \u003d\u003d obj_ref.obj_id"},{"line_number":329,"context_line":""},{"line_number":330,"context_line":"    def _delete_session(self, session):"},{"line_number":331,"context_line":"        self.client.delete_object(self.broker.account,"},{"line_number":332,"context_line":"                                  self.broker.container,"},{"line_number":333,"context_line":"                                  session.name)"},{"line_number":334,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"d655af58_ea3e6e0a","line":331,"in_reply_to":"6850cb4e_5926670f","updated":"2026-08-05 12:12:08.000000000","message":"great question 😉\n\nthe two are actually the same. \n\nThis auditor class is processing mpu session objects in the hidden account sessions container, so when referring to session objects I chose to just use the broker account: the session object is what the auditor is processing and therefore it is in the account of the broker that the auditor is working on.\n\nHowever, I chose to use self.hidden_account when building paths to part objects  which are in a parts container that is \"alien\" to the session container that is being audited.  In practice the parts container and sessions container are both in the same hidden account so the two are interchangeable, but it seemed better to use the more abstract description of hidden_account. In other words, it\u0027s a \"style\" choice rather than anything of significance.","commit_id":"2cf8c8e1b6cfca3dd35807edfca81a9a08d72b8d"}]}