> 1. I think the preservation of existing driver subscriptions is good. > Maybe the code can be DRY if `required_subscribers.add(pillar.driver)` > was in the ` if information_type in PRIVATE_INFORMATION_TYPES` block
Sure, that's doable; it also needs the !ubuntu check on it. > 2. Is the bug reporter and person making the information type change > also subscribed and given an access grant? They are; line 8 of the current diff. > 3. Is there a test that shows that the reporter, changer, and driver > have access? Yes--those are the modified tests in test_bug. They don't directly test access, as they began as subscriber checks, but as you can only be subscribed to a bug you have access to on a private change, the function is tested. We could update those tests to explicitly check for access, if you think we no longer need any subscriber tests; if we need to preserve those tests I'm hesitant to add more as they would be essentially identical checks. -- https://code.launchpad.net/~jcsackett/launchpad/remove-bad-subscribers/+merge/117771 Your team Launchpad code reviewers is subscribed to branch lp:launchpad. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-reviewers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-reviewers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
