)]}'
{"REVIEWING.rst":[{"author":{"_account_id":20190,"name":"zhufl","email":"zhu.fanglei@zte.com.cn","username":"zhufl"},"change_message_id":"ed6fb41b251669fde78ee2f34dddd3b130e281b3","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":163,"context_line":"  two +2\u0027s."},{"line_number":164,"context_line":"* If a patch set unblocks a failing gate in another project -- due to a failing"},{"line_number":165,"context_line":"  test, for example -- it is OK for 1 core reviewer to fast-track the change"},{"line_number":166,"context_line":"  by +2\u0027ing and merging it, provided that a core on the other project +1\u0027s the"},{"line_number":167,"context_line":"  change, too. Note that such a policy should be used rather sparingly, as we"},{"line_number":168,"context_line":"  should strive to have 2 +2\u0027s on each patch set, prior to approval."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"3f79a3b5_d374ce9e","line":166,"range":{"start_line":166,"start_character":69,"end_line":166,"end_character":74},"updated":"2018-09-17 03:24:33.000000000","message":"I am not sure, why \"+1\u0027s\", not \"+1\"?","commit_id":"12bf8d2144c4c2f0b54677f42cc19b2941571346"},{"author":{"_account_id":6167,"name":"Ken\u0027ichi Ohmichi","email":"ken1ohmichi@gmail.com","username":"oomichi"},"change_message_id":"d0d417bb5003dd45fd02a8bab3da9782e8eb1ed3","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":163,"context_line":"  two +2\u0027s."},{"line_number":164,"context_line":"* If a patch set unblocks a failing gate in another project -- due to a failing"},{"line_number":165,"context_line":"  test, for example -- it is OK for 1 core reviewer to fast-track the change"},{"line_number":166,"context_line":"  by +2\u0027ing and merging it, provided that a core on the other project +1\u0027s the"},{"line_number":167,"context_line":"  change, too. Note that such a policy should be used rather sparingly, as we"},{"line_number":168,"context_line":"  should strive to have 2 +2\u0027s on each patch set, prior to approval."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"3f79a3b5_77c39807","line":166,"range":{"start_line":166,"start_character":16,"end_line":166,"end_character":23},"updated":"2018-09-26 18:47:23.000000000","message":"s/merge/approving/","commit_id":"12bf8d2144c4c2f0b54677f42cc19b2941571346"},{"author":{"_account_id":23186,"name":"Felipe Monteiro","email":"felipe.carneiro.monteiro@gmail.com","username":"felipe.monteiro"},"change_message_id":"9d59f354a42f5b91552fe5e64d787e7b6c87456b","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":163,"context_line":"  two +2\u0027s."},{"line_number":164,"context_line":"* If a patch set unblocks a failing gate in another project -- due to a failing"},{"line_number":165,"context_line":"  test, for example -- it is OK for 1 core reviewer to fast-track the change"},{"line_number":166,"context_line":"  by +2\u0027ing and merging it, provided that a core on the other project +1\u0027s the"},{"line_number":167,"context_line":"  change, too. Note that such a policy should be used rather sparingly, as we"},{"line_number":168,"context_line":"  should strive to have 2 +2\u0027s on each patch set, prior to approval."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"3f79a3b5_dae1c5ff","line":166,"range":{"start_line":166,"start_character":69,"end_line":166,"end_character":74},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_5368beb8","updated":"2018-09-21 22:11:30.000000000","message":"Yes, it\u0027s third person singular case. Arguably it could be changed to +1s. But these are basically made up verbs so the rules are a bit loose here.","commit_id":"12bf8d2144c4c2f0b54677f42cc19b2941571346"},{"author":{"_account_id":20190,"name":"zhufl","email":"zhu.fanglei@zte.com.cn","username":"zhufl"},"change_message_id":"4e0c49781a030202da8fae51cbf063b4051bbedb","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":163,"context_line":"  two +2\u0027s."},{"line_number":164,"context_line":"* If a patch set unblocks a failing gate in another project -- due to a failing"},{"line_number":165,"context_line":"  test, for example -- it is OK for 1 core reviewer to fast-track the change"},{"line_number":166,"context_line":"  by +2\u0027ing and merging it, provided that a core on the other project +1\u0027s the"},{"line_number":167,"context_line":"  change, too. Note that such a policy should be used rather sparingly, as we"},{"line_number":168,"context_line":"  should strive to have 2 +2\u0027s on each patch set, prior to approval."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"3f79a3b5_5368beb8","line":166,"range":{"start_line":166,"start_character":69,"end_line":166,"end_character":74},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_d374ce9e","updated":"2018-09-17 03:26:48.000000000","message":"Does it mean \"third person singular\"? :)","commit_id":"12bf8d2144c4c2f0b54677f42cc19b2941571346"},{"author":{"_account_id":20190,"name":"zhufl","email":"zhu.fanglei@zte.com.cn","username":"zhufl"},"change_message_id":"82b78bafa22fc7834a32ddfe87b995d84c951b4c","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":163,"context_line":"  two +2\u0027s."},{"line_number":164,"context_line":"* If a patch set unblocks a failing gate in another project -- due to a failing"},{"line_number":165,"context_line":"  test, for example -- it is OK for 1 core reviewer to fast-track the change"},{"line_number":166,"context_line":"  by +2\u0027ing and merging it, provided that a core on the other project +1\u0027s the"},{"line_number":167,"context_line":"  change, too. Note that such a policy should be used rather sparingly, as we"},{"line_number":168,"context_line":"  should strive to have 2 +2\u0027s on each patch set, prior to approval."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"3f79a3b5_42dfe765","line":166,"range":{"start_line":166,"start_character":69,"end_line":166,"end_character":74},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_dae1c5ff","updated":"2018-09-25 07:39:23.000000000","message":"o, interesting grammar:)","commit_id":"12bf8d2144c4c2f0b54677f42cc19b2941571346"},{"author":{"_account_id":6167,"name":"Ken\u0027ichi Ohmichi","email":"ken1ohmichi@gmail.com","username":"oomichi"},"change_message_id":"74087b10f22831af038c1e6751ec5e2dfbac50c2","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":163,"context_line":"  two +2\u0027s."},{"line_number":164,"context_line":"* If a patch set unblocks a failing gate in another project -- due to a failing"},{"line_number":165,"context_line":"  test, for example -- it is OK for 1 core reviewer to fast-track the change"},{"line_number":166,"context_line":"  by +2\u0027ing and merging it, provided that a core on the other project +1\u0027s the"},{"line_number":167,"context_line":"  change, too. Note that such a policy should be used rather sparingly, as we"},{"line_number":168,"context_line":"  should strive to have 2 +2\u0027s on each patch set, prior to approval."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"3f79a3b5_a231f0ef","line":167,"range":{"start_line":166,"start_character":28,"end_line":167,"end_character":8},"updated":"2018-09-26 18:59:11.000000000","message":"Since learning from https://review.openstack.org/#/c/605488 we can add an exception case which is a core of the other project proposes the patch set also.","commit_id":"12bf8d2144c4c2f0b54677f42cc19b2941571346"},{"author":{"_account_id":27078,"name":"Manik Bindlish","email":"manikbindlish19@gmail.com","username":"manik"},"change_message_id":"c1fa4112fe1c51fba332a2e730b055e5e3008bb5","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":165,"context_line":"  test, for example -- it is OK for 1 core reviewer to fast-track the change"},{"line_number":166,"context_line":"  by +2\u0027ing and merging it, provided that a core on the other project +1\u0027s the"},{"line_number":167,"context_line":"  change, too. Note that such a policy should be used rather sparingly, as we"},{"line_number":168,"context_line":"  should strive to have 2 +2\u0027s on each patch set, prior to approval."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"3f79a3b5_365c504b","line":168,"range":{"start_line":168,"start_character":24,"end_line":168,"end_character":30},"updated":"2018-09-26 09:31:18.000000000","message":"Isn\u0027t it should be like: \"two +2\u0027s\" as in L[159]?\nA soft -1 till the clearance.","commit_id":"12bf8d2144c4c2f0b54677f42cc19b2941571346"},{"author":{"_account_id":6167,"name":"Ken\u0027ichi Ohmichi","email":"ken1ohmichi@gmail.com","username":"oomichi"},"change_message_id":"3dc17e3170ad6bc559963b4f6d69180b28d10a05","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":158,"context_line":"---------------"},{"line_number":159,"context_line":"* Every patch needs two +2\u0027s before being approved."},{"line_number":160,"context_line":"* It\u0027s OK to hold off on an approval until a subject matter expert reviews it."},{"line_number":161,"context_line":"* If a patch has already been approved but requires a trivial rebase to merge,"},{"line_number":162,"context_line":"  you do not have to wait for a second +2, since the patch has already had"},{"line_number":163,"context_line":"  two +2\u0027s."},{"line_number":164,"context_line":"* If a patch set unblocks a failing gate in another project -- due to a failing"},{"line_number":165,"context_line":"  test, for example -- it is OK for 1 core reviewer to fast-track the change"},{"line_number":166,"context_line":"  by +2\u0027ing and merging it, provided that a core on the other project +1\u0027s the"},{"line_number":167,"context_line":"  change, too. Note that such a policy should be used rather sparingly, as we"},{"line_number":168,"context_line":"  should strive to have 2 +2\u0027s on each patch set, prior to approval."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"3f79a3b5_573a1ce6","line":168,"range":{"start_line":161,"start_character":0,"end_line":168,"end_character":68},"updated":"2018-09-26 18:52:12.000000000","message":"Maybe it is better to separate this two cases for easy understanding like:\n\n * It\u0027s OK to hold off on ...\n * A single core reviewer can approve pathces without waiting\n   for another +2 in the following cases:\n ** If a patch has already been approved but ..\n ** If a patch set unblocks a failing gate in ...\n\nBut it is fine to do that with another patch for cleanup.","commit_id":"12bf8d2144c4c2f0b54677f42cc19b2941571346"},{"author":{"_account_id":23186,"name":"Felipe Monteiro","email":"felipe.carneiro.monteiro@gmail.com","username":"felipe.monteiro"},"change_message_id":"7e29b5747f2b420f88f99db32aa24d63ad01afe1","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":158,"context_line":"---------------"},{"line_number":159,"context_line":"* Every patch needs two +2\u0027s before being approved."},{"line_number":160,"context_line":"* It\u0027s OK to hold off on an approval until a subject matter expert reviews it."},{"line_number":161,"context_line":"* If a patch has already been approved but requires a trivial rebase to merge,"},{"line_number":162,"context_line":"  you do not have to wait for a second +2, since the patch has already had"},{"line_number":163,"context_line":"  two +2\u0027s."},{"line_number":164,"context_line":"* If a patch set unblocks a failing gate in another project -- due to a failing"},{"line_number":165,"context_line":"  test, for example -- it is OK for 1 core reviewer to fast-track the change"},{"line_number":166,"context_line":"  by +2\u0027ing and merging it, provided that a core on the other project +1\u0027s the"},{"line_number":167,"context_line":"  change, too. Note that such a policy should be used rather sparingly, as we"},{"line_number":168,"context_line":"  should strive to have 2 +2\u0027s on each patch set, prior to approval."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"3f79a3b5_625f584d","line":168,"range":{"start_line":161,"start_character":0,"end_line":168,"end_character":68},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_573a1ce6","updated":"2018-09-26 19:43:58.000000000","message":"Thanks, will make suggested changes!","commit_id":"12bf8d2144c4c2f0b54677f42cc19b2941571346"},{"author":{"_account_id":23186,"name":"Felipe Monteiro","email":"felipe.carneiro.monteiro@gmail.com","username":"felipe.monteiro"},"change_message_id":"49cb8d13b4667ac2bf3d402cf4bb1f5dad5fb0dd","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":158,"context_line":"---------------"},{"line_number":159,"context_line":"* Every patch needs two +2\u0027s before being approved."},{"line_number":160,"context_line":"* It\u0027s OK to hold off on an approval until a subject matter expert reviews it."},{"line_number":161,"context_line":"* If a patch has already been approved but requires a trivial rebase to merge,"},{"line_number":162,"context_line":"  you do not have to wait for a second +2, since the patch has already had"},{"line_number":163,"context_line":"  two +2\u0027s."},{"line_number":164,"context_line":"* If a patch set unblocks a failing gate in another project -- due to a failing"},{"line_number":165,"context_line":"  test, for example -- it is OK for 1 core reviewer to fast-track the change"},{"line_number":166,"context_line":"  by +2\u0027ing and merging it, provided that a core on the other project +1\u0027s the"},{"line_number":167,"context_line":"  change, too. Note that such a policy should be used rather sparingly, as we"},{"line_number":168,"context_line":"  should strive to have 2 +2\u0027s on each patch set, prior to approval."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":1,"id":"3f79a3b5_91fe3904","line":168,"range":{"start_line":161,"start_character":0,"end_line":168,"end_character":68},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_625f584d","updated":"2018-09-29 23:43:15.000000000","message":"@Ken\u0027ichi: Thanks for the suggestions, done.\n@Manik: That suggestion is just a nit, but I\u0027m OK to do it. \"two +2\u0027s\" \u003d\u003d \"2 +2\u0027s\" but I think the first case is a little clearer.","commit_id":"12bf8d2144c4c2f0b54677f42cc19b2941571346"},{"author":{"_account_id":5803,"name":"Attila Fazekas","email":"afazekas@redhat.com","username":"afazekas"},"change_message_id":"bd3caabdf65b1338f5a79d31f46a027cea55eb70","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":172,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is submitted (e.g. to fix a bug that blocks another"},{"line_number":173,"context_line":"    project\u0027s gate) by a regular contributor, provided that a core reviewer of"},{"line_number":174,"context_line":"    the other project +1\u0027s the change, too."},{"line_number":175,"context_line":"  * A core on the other project submits a high-priority patch set that affects"},{"line_number":176,"context_line":"    their project or gate."},{"line_number":177,"context_line":""},{"line_number":178,"context_line":"  Note that such a policy should be used judiciously, as we should strive to"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":3,"id":"3f79a3b5_289d6c08","line":175,"updated":"2018-10-01 12:46:02.000000000","message":"IMHO we if the change looks like API breakage , the other projects core `symbolic` should overwrote tempest and put 2x +2 to the -V change , in order to make it clear even if change breaks API this is what the project wants .\n\nwe may risk API breakage ,so two tempest core should be required here too.","commit_id":"d1edd68407317e5d96c5c6c78ab661b034935b93"},{"author":{"_account_id":23186,"name":"Felipe Monteiro","email":"felipe.carneiro.monteiro@gmail.com","username":"felipe.monteiro"},"change_message_id":"588152fd18794d8ef7a0c0c4eb829fbdcddb7b5c","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":172,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is submitted (e.g. to fix a bug that blocks another"},{"line_number":173,"context_line":"    project\u0027s gate) by a regular contributor, provided that a core reviewer of"},{"line_number":174,"context_line":"    the other project +1\u0027s the change, too."},{"line_number":175,"context_line":"  * A core on the other project submits a high-priority patch set that affects"},{"line_number":176,"context_line":"    their project or gate."},{"line_number":177,"context_line":""},{"line_number":178,"context_line":"  Note that such a policy should be used judiciously, as we should strive to"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":3,"id":"3f79a3b5_da1ea574","line":175,"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_289d6c08","updated":"2018-10-04 16:46:46.000000000","message":"Would you prefer \"A core on the other project submits a high-priority patch set that UNBLOCKS their project or gate\"? In this case I feel like 1 +2 and a core submission should be enough. Because in this case their gate is already broken so any fast-track approval will not break what is already broken.\n\nWhat is your opinion?","commit_id":"d1edd68407317e5d96c5c6c78ab661b034935b93"},{"author":{"_account_id":23186,"name":"Felipe Monteiro","email":"felipe.carneiro.monteiro@gmail.com","username":"felipe.monteiro"},"change_message_id":"b568508cac2e65d12c03c71518033bd1d097701b","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":172,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is submitted (e.g. to fix a bug that blocks another"},{"line_number":173,"context_line":"    project\u0027s gate) by a regular contributor, provided that a core reviewer of"},{"line_number":174,"context_line":"    the other project +1\u0027s the change, too."},{"line_number":175,"context_line":"  * A core on the other project submits a high-priority patch set that affects"},{"line_number":176,"context_line":"    their project or gate."},{"line_number":177,"context_line":""},{"line_number":178,"context_line":"  Note that such a policy should be used judiciously, as we should strive to"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":3,"id":"3f79a3b5_6fb4b51d","line":175,"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_71435d41","updated":"2018-10-14 04:09:14.000000000","message":"Done","commit_id":"d1edd68407317e5d96c5c6c78ab661b034935b93"},{"author":{"_account_id":6167,"name":"Ken\u0027ichi Ohmichi","email":"ken1ohmichi@gmail.com","username":"oomichi"},"change_message_id":"7c6fcf3f32d9d129c19ab8a3b5ed479434a5e020","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":172,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is submitted (e.g. to fix a bug that blocks another"},{"line_number":173,"context_line":"    project\u0027s gate) by a regular contributor, provided that a core reviewer of"},{"line_number":174,"context_line":"    the other project +1\u0027s the change, too."},{"line_number":175,"context_line":"  * A core on the other project submits a high-priority patch set that affects"},{"line_number":176,"context_line":"    their project or gate."},{"line_number":177,"context_line":""},{"line_number":178,"context_line":"  Note that such a policy should be used judiciously, as we should strive to"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":3,"id":"3f79a3b5_71435d41","line":175,"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_da1ea574","updated":"2018-10-11 21:26:33.000000000","message":"afazekas has a nice point.\nCurrent description could allow us API breakage and I saw such situation before.\nI feel\n\n \"A core on the other project submits a patch set which UNBLOCKS their project own gate\"\n\nor something is more clear for us.","commit_id":"d1edd68407317e5d96c5c6c78ab661b034935b93"},{"author":{"_account_id":8556,"name":"Ghanshyam Maan","display_name":"Ghanshyam Maan","email":"gmaan.os14@gmail.com","username":"ghanshyam"},"change_message_id":"46f73d7806a42f548737c9d081ea840fec6f78e7","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":167,"context_line":"* A single Tempest core reviewer can approve patches without waiting for"},{"line_number":168,"context_line":"  another +2 in the following cases:"},{"line_number":169,"context_line":""},{"line_number":170,"context_line":"  * If a patch has already been approved the normal way but required a trivial"},{"line_number":171,"context_line":"    rebase to resolve a merge conflict."},{"line_number":172,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is submitted (e.g. to fix a bug that blocks another"},{"line_number":173,"context_line":"    project\u0027s gate) by a regular contributor, provided that a core reviewer of"},{"line_number":174,"context_line":"    the other project +1\u0027s the change, too."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":5,"id":"3f79a3b5_fa6a9a15","line":171,"range":{"start_line":170,"start_character":0,"end_line":171,"end_character":39},"updated":"2018-10-16 11:08:12.000000000","message":"what is difference between this point from L167","commit_id":"1e2535d2dab0fe60da4d277dff15cf548f408962"},{"author":{"_account_id":23186,"name":"Felipe Monteiro","email":"felipe.carneiro.monteiro@gmail.com","username":"felipe.monteiro"},"change_message_id":"430b4b445293fddb1e1db1520cb1ced8dd718ed0","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":167,"context_line":"* A single Tempest core reviewer can approve patches without waiting for"},{"line_number":168,"context_line":"  another +2 in the following cases:"},{"line_number":169,"context_line":""},{"line_number":170,"context_line":"  * If a patch has already been approved the normal way but required a trivial"},{"line_number":171,"context_line":"    rebase to resolve a merge conflict."},{"line_number":172,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is submitted (e.g. to fix a bug that blocks another"},{"line_number":173,"context_line":"    project\u0027s gate) by a regular contributor, provided that a core reviewer of"},{"line_number":174,"context_line":"    the other project +1\u0027s the change, too."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":5,"id":"3f79a3b5_730541c0","line":171,"range":{"start_line":170,"start_character":0,"end_line":171,"end_character":39},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_fa6a9a15","updated":"2018-10-17 02:06:53.000000000","message":"Sorry, I missed L164-166. I will move that section here.","commit_id":"1e2535d2dab0fe60da4d277dff15cf548f408962"},{"author":{"_account_id":8556,"name":"Ghanshyam Maan","display_name":"Ghanshyam Maan","email":"gmaan.os14@gmail.com","username":"ghanshyam"},"change_message_id":"46f73d7806a42f548737c9d081ea840fec6f78e7","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":169,"context_line":""},{"line_number":170,"context_line":"  * If a patch has already been approved the normal way but required a trivial"},{"line_number":171,"context_line":"    rebase to resolve a merge conflict."},{"line_number":172,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is submitted (e.g. to fix a bug that blocks another"},{"line_number":173,"context_line":"    project\u0027s gate) by a regular contributor, provided that a core reviewer of"},{"line_number":174,"context_line":"    the other project +1\u0027s the change, too."},{"line_number":175,"context_line":"  * A core on the other project submits a patch set which **unblocks** their"},{"line_number":176,"context_line":"    own project gate."},{"line_number":177,"context_line":""},{"line_number":178,"context_line":"  Note that such a policy should be used judiciously, as we should strive to"},{"line_number":179,"context_line":"  have two +2\u0027s on each patch set, prior to approval."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":5,"id":"3f79a3b5_0d3e42b8","line":176,"range":{"start_line":172,"start_character":0,"end_line":176,"end_character":21},"updated":"2018-10-16 11:08:12.000000000","message":"I wanted to make it little more strict with PTL +1 not just core (like infra changes policy). Also these both can be single exception like\n- if any patch unblocking the project gate and does not effect any other project gate testing coverage or other side effect, and it has blocked project PTL +1.","commit_id":"1e2535d2dab0fe60da4d277dff15cf548f408962"},{"author":{"_account_id":23186,"name":"Felipe Monteiro","email":"felipe.carneiro.monteiro@gmail.com","username":"felipe.monteiro"},"change_message_id":"430b4b445293fddb1e1db1520cb1ced8dd718ed0","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":169,"context_line":""},{"line_number":170,"context_line":"  * If a patch has already been approved the normal way but required a trivial"},{"line_number":171,"context_line":"    rebase to resolve a merge conflict."},{"line_number":172,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is submitted (e.g. to fix a bug that blocks another"},{"line_number":173,"context_line":"    project\u0027s gate) by a regular contributor, provided that a core reviewer of"},{"line_number":174,"context_line":"    the other project +1\u0027s the change, too."},{"line_number":175,"context_line":"  * A core on the other project submits a patch set which **unblocks** their"},{"line_number":176,"context_line":"    own project gate."},{"line_number":177,"context_line":""},{"line_number":178,"context_line":"  Note that such a policy should be used judiciously, as we should strive to"},{"line_number":179,"context_line":"  have two +2\u0027s on each patch set, prior to approval."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":5,"id":"3f79a3b5_f3f071dc","line":176,"range":{"start_line":172,"start_character":0,"end_line":176,"end_character":21},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_0d3e42b8","updated":"2018-10-17 02:06:53.000000000","message":"Will fix in follow up.","commit_id":"1e2535d2dab0fe60da4d277dff15cf548f408962"},{"author":{"_account_id":23186,"name":"Felipe Monteiro","email":"felipe.carneiro.monteiro@gmail.com","username":"felipe.monteiro"},"change_message_id":"38b65f80193a0700773f24256bd3f12190091fc1","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":169,"context_line":""},{"line_number":170,"context_line":"  * If a patch has already been approved the normal way but required a trivial"},{"line_number":171,"context_line":"    rebase to resolve a merge conflict."},{"line_number":172,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is submitted (e.g. to fix a bug that blocks another"},{"line_number":173,"context_line":"    project\u0027s gate) by a regular contributor, provided that a core reviewer of"},{"line_number":174,"context_line":"    the other project +1\u0027s the change, too."},{"line_number":175,"context_line":"  * A core on the other project submits a patch set which **unblocks** their"},{"line_number":176,"context_line":"    own project gate."},{"line_number":177,"context_line":""},{"line_number":178,"context_line":"  Note that such a policy should be used judiciously, as we should strive to"},{"line_number":179,"context_line":"  have two +2\u0027s on each patch set, prior to approval."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":5,"id":"3f79a3b5_d8b38deb","line":176,"range":{"start_line":172,"start_character":0,"end_line":176,"end_character":21},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_936fbd27","updated":"2018-10-23 18:01:39.000000000","message":"Done","commit_id":"1e2535d2dab0fe60da4d277dff15cf548f408962"},{"author":{"_account_id":8556,"name":"Ghanshyam Maan","display_name":"Ghanshyam Maan","email":"gmaan.os14@gmail.com","username":"ghanshyam"},"change_message_id":"07453fe6ad433b6eaa9fb83a348c701696bc424b","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":169,"context_line":""},{"line_number":170,"context_line":"  * If a patch has already been approved the normal way but required a trivial"},{"line_number":171,"context_line":"    rebase to resolve a merge conflict."},{"line_number":172,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is submitted (e.g. to fix a bug that blocks another"},{"line_number":173,"context_line":"    project\u0027s gate) by a regular contributor, provided that a core reviewer of"},{"line_number":174,"context_line":"    the other project +1\u0027s the change, too."},{"line_number":175,"context_line":"  * A core on the other project submits a patch set which **unblocks** their"},{"line_number":176,"context_line":"    own project gate."},{"line_number":177,"context_line":""},{"line_number":178,"context_line":"  Note that such a policy should be used judiciously, as we should strive to"},{"line_number":179,"context_line":"  have two +2\u0027s on each patch set, prior to approval."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":5,"id":"3f79a3b5_936fbd27","line":176,"range":{"start_line":172,"start_character":0,"end_line":176,"end_character":21},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_f3f071dc","updated":"2018-10-17 02:29:20.000000000","message":"also we can add nit typo or link update patches in this category like this one-  https://review.openstack.org/#/c/611032/","commit_id":"1e2535d2dab0fe60da4d277dff15cf548f408962"},{"author":{"_account_id":8556,"name":"Ghanshyam Maan","display_name":"Ghanshyam Maan","email":"gmaan.os14@gmail.com","username":"ghanshyam"},"change_message_id":"331d1623e6e4d1438f3483d89ad0bea75088c38b","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":167,"context_line":"  * If a patch has already been approved but requires a trivial rebase to"},{"line_number":168,"context_line":"    merge, then there is no need to wait for a second +2, since the patch has"},{"line_number":169,"context_line":"    already had two +2\u0027s."},{"line_number":170,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is not code-impacting and completely trivial like this"},{"line_number":171,"context_line":"    `example`_."},{"line_number":172,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is submitted (e.g. to fix a bug that blocks another"},{"line_number":173,"context_line":"    project\u0027s gate) by a regular contributor, provided that the PTL of"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":7,"id":"3f79a3b5_a1665ced","line":170,"range":{"start_line":170,"start_character":26,"end_line":170,"end_character":41},"updated":"2018-10-26 06:47:13.000000000","message":"not only code but CI or doc also. may we can write something:\n\n* Any trivial patch set fixing below type of changes:\n - Doc or Code comment typo\n - Doc ref link\n - Example: `example`_\n (NOTE: any other small doc, CI jobs, code change does not fall in this category)","commit_id":"8e5292e5e83e138c93b27e8fb693dc31663dda55"},{"author":{"_account_id":23186,"name":"Felipe Monteiro","email":"felipe.carneiro.monteiro@gmail.com","username":"felipe.monteiro"},"change_message_id":"7b2735e377c64b0a546ad81ae1a890d3eacaab9d","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":167,"context_line":"  * If a patch has already been approved but requires a trivial rebase to"},{"line_number":168,"context_line":"    merge, then there is no need to wait for a second +2, since the patch has"},{"line_number":169,"context_line":"    already had two +2\u0027s."},{"line_number":170,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is not code-impacting and completely trivial like this"},{"line_number":171,"context_line":"    `example`_."},{"line_number":172,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is submitted (e.g. to fix a bug that blocks another"},{"line_number":173,"context_line":"    project\u0027s gate) by a regular contributor, provided that the PTL of"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":7,"id":"3f79a3b5_89069f1b","line":170,"range":{"start_line":170,"start_character":26,"end_line":170,"end_character":41},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_a1665ced","updated":"2018-10-30 23:32:07.000000000","message":"Done","commit_id":"8e5292e5e83e138c93b27e8fb693dc31663dda55"},{"author":{"_account_id":8556,"name":"Ghanshyam Maan","display_name":"Ghanshyam Maan","email":"gmaan.os14@gmail.com","username":"ghanshyam"},"change_message_id":"331d1623e6e4d1438f3483d89ad0bea75088c38b","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":169,"context_line":"    already had two +2\u0027s."},{"line_number":170,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is not code-impacting and completely trivial like this"},{"line_number":171,"context_line":"    `example`_."},{"line_number":172,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is submitted (e.g. to fix a bug that blocks another"},{"line_number":173,"context_line":"    project\u0027s gate) by a regular contributor, provided that the PTL of"},{"line_number":174,"context_line":"    the other project +1\u0027s the change."},{"line_number":175,"context_line":"  * If the patch **unblocks** a failing project gate, provided that:"},{"line_number":176,"context_line":""},{"line_number":177,"context_line":"    * the project\u0027s PTL +1\u0027s the change"},{"line_number":178,"context_line":"    * the patch does not affect any other project\u0027s testing gates"},{"line_number":179,"context_line":"    * the patch does not cause any negative side effects"},{"line_number":180,"context_line":""},{"line_number":181,"context_line":"  Note that such a policy should be used judiciously, as we should strive to"},{"line_number":182,"context_line":"  have two +2\u0027s on each patch set, prior to approval."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":7,"id":"3f79a3b5_c13838cc","line":179,"range":{"start_line":172,"start_character":3,"end_line":179,"end_character":56},"updated":"2018-10-26 06:47:13.000000000","message":"these 2 are same thing right? we can merge them into single point.","commit_id":"8e5292e5e83e138c93b27e8fb693dc31663dda55"},{"author":{"_account_id":23186,"name":"Felipe Monteiro","email":"felipe.carneiro.monteiro@gmail.com","username":"felipe.monteiro"},"change_message_id":"7b2735e377c64b0a546ad81ae1a890d3eacaab9d","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":169,"context_line":"    already had two +2\u0027s."},{"line_number":170,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is not code-impacting and completely trivial like this"},{"line_number":171,"context_line":"    `example`_."},{"line_number":172,"context_line":"  * If a patch set is submitted (e.g. to fix a bug that blocks another"},{"line_number":173,"context_line":"    project\u0027s gate) by a regular contributor, provided that the PTL of"},{"line_number":174,"context_line":"    the other project +1\u0027s the change."},{"line_number":175,"context_line":"  * If the patch **unblocks** a failing project gate, provided that:"},{"line_number":176,"context_line":""},{"line_number":177,"context_line":"    * the project\u0027s PTL +1\u0027s the change"},{"line_number":178,"context_line":"    * the patch does not affect any other project\u0027s testing gates"},{"line_number":179,"context_line":"    * the patch does not cause any negative side effects"},{"line_number":180,"context_line":""},{"line_number":181,"context_line":"  Note that such a policy should be used judiciously, as we should strive to"},{"line_number":182,"context_line":"  have two +2\u0027s on each patch set, prior to approval."}],"source_content_type":"text/x-rst","patch_set":7,"id":"3f79a3b5_c649e48d","line":179,"range":{"start_line":172,"start_character":3,"end_line":179,"end_character":56},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_c13838cc","updated":"2018-10-30 23:32:07.000000000","message":"Done","commit_id":"8e5292e5e83e138c93b27e8fb693dc31663dda55"}]}