charm-rabbitmq-server/81ca5adfac63da40cc9a53c779f5c06d992966e1

{
  "comments": [
    {
      "unresolved": false,
      "key": {
        "uuid": "11eb484b_49e6c362",
        "filename": "/PATCHSET_LEVEL",
        "patchSetId": 9
      },
      "lineNbr": 0,
      "author": {
        "id": 8992
      },
      "writtenOn": "2022-04-07T14:53:04Z",
      "side": 1,
      "message": "recheck",
      "revId": "81ca5adfac63da40cc9a53c779f5c06d992966e1",
      "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543"
    },
    {
      "unresolved": false,
      "key": {
        "uuid": "e2aad948_f2767e04",
        "filename": "/PATCHSET_LEVEL",
        "patchSetId": 9
      },
      "lineNbr": 0,
      "author": {
        "id": 8992
      },
      "writtenOn": "2022-04-07T18:15:11Z",
      "side": 1,
      "message": "charm-recheck",
      "revId": "81ca5adfac63da40cc9a53c779f5c06d992966e1",
      "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543"
    },
    {
      "unresolved": false,
      "key": {
        "uuid": "7c0a5e0b_fac19ac6",
        "filename": "/PATCHSET_LEVEL",
        "patchSetId": 9
      },
      "lineNbr": 0,
      "author": {
        "id": 10366
      },
      "writtenOn": "2022-04-08T03:54:04Z",
      "side": 1,
      "message": "LGTM!",
      "revId": "81ca5adfac63da40cc9a53c779f5c06d992966e1",
      "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543"
    },
    {
      "unresolved": false,
      "key": {
        "uuid": "d88f329d_aeaf3e55",
        "filename": "/PATCHSET_LEVEL",
        "patchSetId": 9
      },
      "lineNbr": 0,
      "author": {
        "id": 2424
      },
      "writtenOn": "2022-04-12T22:15:01Z",
      "side": 1,
      "message": "Hi Trent,\n\nI left some minor comments inline, but in general the patch lgtm.\n\nBest,",
      "revId": "81ca5adfac63da40cc9a53c779f5c06d992966e1",
      "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543"
    },
    {
      "unresolved": false,
      "key": {
        "uuid": "4bace327_b0eae9f4",
        "filename": "/PATCHSET_LEVEL",
        "patchSetId": 9
      },
      "lineNbr": 0,
      "author": {
        "id": 19298
      },
      "writtenOn": "2023-01-04T20:50:21Z",
      "side": 1,
      "message": "LGTM. Once Felipe\u0027s comments are addressed I am all for a \"+1\"",
      "revId": "81ca5adfac63da40cc9a53c779f5c06d992966e1",
      "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543"
    },
    {
      "unresolved": true,
      "key": {
        "uuid": "09564f60_18b56496",
        "filename": "config.yaml",
        "patchSetId": 9
      },
      "lineNbr": 352,
      "author": {
        "id": 14567
      },
      "writtenOn": "2024-01-05T12:43:20Z",
      "side": 1,
      "message": "doesn\u0027t adding a new config option with a value that differs from the default (even if the default is omitted from the config file) cause restarts? and wouldn\u0027t those restarts be disruptive? I am just a bit concerned a charm upgrade could inadvertently restart rabbit and put it into a split brain scenario, or in the best case scenario, disrupt the cloud\u0027s activity. There is no mention of caution anywhere here (although I don\u0027t fully agree it should be here, but maybe a charm guide release note patch accompaning this one perhaps).\n\nCould you please clarify?",
      "range": {
        "startLine": 351,
        "startChar": 4,
        "endLine": 352,
        "endChar": 33
      },
      "revId": "81ca5adfac63da40cc9a53c779f5c06d992966e1",
      "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543"
    },
    {
      "unresolved": true,
      "key": {
        "uuid": "c75bb987_722933f2",
        "filename": "hooks/rabbit_utils.py",
        "patchSetId": 9
      },
      "lineNbr": 805,
      "author": {
        "id": 2424
      },
      "writtenOn": "2022-04-12T22:15:01Z",
      "side": 1,
      "message": "it would be nice to have this information as a log(..., INFO) when the promote on shutdown config is discarded so operators can identify why the charm is not setting the option in rabbit.",
      "revId": "81ca5adfac63da40cc9a53c779f5c06d992966e1",
      "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543"
    },
    {
      "unresolved": true,
      "key": {
        "uuid": "882112c8_5fd05525",
        "filename": "hooks/rabbit_utils.py",
        "patchSetId": 9
      },
      "lineNbr": 839,
      "author": {
        "id": 2424
      },
      "writtenOn": "2022-04-12T22:15:01Z",
      "side": 1,
      "message": "please add a docstring for the parameter.",
      "revId": "81ca5adfac63da40cc9a53c779f5c06d992966e1",
      "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543"
    },
    {
      "unresolved": true,
      "key": {
        "uuid": "ddd92e4f_671512f9",
        "filename": "hooks/rabbit_utils.py",
        "patchSetId": 9
      },
      "lineNbr": 847,
      "author": {
        "id": 2424
      },
      "writtenOn": "2022-04-12T22:15:01Z",
      "side": 1,
      "message": "the general guideline for when a user provides an invalid value for a config is to pick a \"good value\" (e.g. the default value), log the issue and move on, but not set the charm to blocked state nor short circuit the hook execution.",
      "revId": "81ca5adfac63da40cc9a53c779f5c06d992966e1",
      "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543"
    }
  ]
}