Add a hash package.

This is for juju backups.
Hmm.  I've gotten similar feedback from others.  So first let me offer my reservations here and then if you still feel strongly about it I'll remove the dividers. :)

Personally I find that dividers like this are really useful for visual separation between conceptually grouped code.  Labeling the divisions (in this case with the associated method name) gives a name to the group.  To me such dividers are generally beneficial, not just as I've used them here between the different method-specific tests.

What are the benefits you ask?  Comments-as-dividers are great when scanning through the code (discoverability, etc.).  Additionally, they help encourage keeping code grouped rather than scattered about as I've seen in so many other files.  That alone is a big win in my books.  As far as I know there isn't any extra cost associated with the extra comment lines, and obviously I don't consider them noise.  So what's the downside?  If it's a question of precedent, I'm glad to set it. :)  If it's a question of consistency, I'm glad to propose the recommendation for divider comments in our new style guide.  However, as I said, if you find my arguments unconvincing I will remove the dividers ("status quo wins a stalemate").

p.s. I come from a strong Python background where the syntax of class definitions gives you a visual grouping (and local namespaces) for free.  Unless there is something I'm missing (Go is pretty new to me), divider comments are the best tool I've got for grouping code in a file.