---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30961/#review79150
---
Minor suggestions.
src/hook/manager.cpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32585/#review79146
---
LGTM, assuming no significant rebases.
src/master/master.hpp
On March 30, 2015, 3:23 a.m., Adam B wrote:
Minor cleanup/suggestions, but otherwise good. We'll definitely need to
document te module(-manager) API change of overriding the label set instead
of merging. This should probably go in the upgrades doc?
Niklas Nielsen wrote:
Thanks
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32583/#review79142
---
src/slave/slave.cpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32586/#review79147
---
src/slave/slave.cpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31028/#review79152
---
src/examples/test_hook_module.cpp
On April 2, 2015, 6:23 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
include/mesos/master/allocator.proto, lines 19-23
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31776/diff/6/?file=912077#file912077line19
Since allocator is within the same Unix process as Master, what is the
compatibility issue here?
The comment
On April 2, 2015, 7:58 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
src/tests/master_allocator_tests.cpp, lines 96-104
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31263/diff/7/?file=912106#file912106line96
While the TearDown() avoids flakiness by ensuring that an allocator
process doesn't exist after a test, it
On April 2, 2015, 7:59 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
src/master/allocator/mesos/allocator.hpp, line 47
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31265/diff/6/?file=912110#file912110line47
Do you still want the constructor public?
I think there is no reason to hide the c-tor. I can imagine somebody
On April 2, 2015, 6:23 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
src/Makefile.am, line 711
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31776/diff/6/?file=912078#file912078line711
not yours, but can you kill the trailing white space here?
Sure.
- Alexander
On April 2, 2015, 6:33 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
src/Makefile.am, line 1351
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31267/diff/6/?file=912100#file912100line1351
s/drf// to be consistent (e.g., we didn't name libtestauthentication.la
as libcrammd5authentication.la)
Will do.
On April 2,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31776/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 12:46 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Kapil Arya,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31775/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 12:46 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Kapil Arya,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31266/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 12:47 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Kapil Arya,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31267/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 12:47 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Kapil Arya,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31262/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 12:48 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Kapil Arya,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31265/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 12:49 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Kapil Arya,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31268/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 12:49 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Kapil Arya,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31268/#review79175
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [31775, 31776, 31266, 31267,
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Niklas Nielsen nik...@mesosphere.io wrote:
Based on input from Vinod and Adam; I will reduce the scope on the point
release to focus on MESOS-1795 and MESOS-2583.
Can I help test these in any way?
--
/adam
On April 6, 2015, 7:22 p.m., Benjamin Hindman wrote:
src/slave/slave.cpp, line 4164
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32911/diff/1/?file=918555#file918555line4164
Great comment! Can we also add something to the end of the comment that
says that the user is validated when the task goes
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32586/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 12:59 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Adam B and
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32587/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 1 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Adam B and Niklas
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32700/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 1 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Adam B and Niklas
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32583/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 12:59 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Adam B and
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32584/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 12:59 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Adam B and
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32585/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 12:59 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Adam B and
On April 7, 2015, 4:06 a.m., Adam B wrote:
src/slave/slave.cpp, line 1108
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32583/diff/4/?file=914631#file914631line1108
If we're always making the copy, should we just pass `frameworkInfo_`
by value and force the copy at the call-site? Then there's no
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32895/#review79212
---
I couldn't verify the behavior detailed in the ticket?
- Ian
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32700/#review79215
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [32583, 32584, 32585, 32586,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32911/#review79198
---
Ship it!
src/slave/slave.cpp
On April 7, 2015, 10:13 a.m., Ian Downes wrote:
src/slave/slave.cpp, line 4166
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32911/diff/1/?file=918555#file918555line4166
getExecutorInfo() will return the ExecutorInfo if the TaskInfo includes
it, otherwise it will construct one (for the command
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32898/#review79209
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Ian Downes
On April 6, 2015, 3:05 p.m.,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32903/#review79208
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Ian Downes
On April 6, 2015, 3:09 p.m.,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32906/#review79206
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Ian Downes
On April 6, 2015, 4:03 p.m.,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32911/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 11:10 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32911/#review79231
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [32911]
All tests passed.
-
Hey Everyone,
I have a question on using the docker containerizer. I have a feeling it
isn’t possible, but, is there a way to use the docker containerizer within
a custom executor? (ie. have it help translate commands to docker and
manage the containers within the wrapper of the custom
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32139/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 9:51 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Alexander
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32139/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 9:52 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Alexander
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32140/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 9:56 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Alexander
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32149/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 10:25 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Alexander
You are right. Then the question is which CLI should it go to? Seems like
src/cli is superseded by https://github.com/mesosphere/mesos-cli too and
should be on the spring cleaning list? I personally don't mind cli to be
inside the core source tree but it seems like
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32939/
---
Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and Cody Maloney.
Repository: mesos
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/29748/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 9:44 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Alexander
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32939/#review79265
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [32939]
All tests passed.
-
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31645/#review79271
---
support/test-upgrade.py
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31016/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 5:57 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30961/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 5:57 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30962/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 5:57 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31028/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 5:57 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32948/
---
Review request for mesos, Adam B and Kapil Arya.
Repository: mesos
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31017/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 5:58 p.m.)
Review request for mesos and Kapil Arya.
On April 7, 2015, 1:41 a.m., Adam B wrote:
src/hook/manager.cpp, line 104
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30961/diff/6/?file=914058#file914058line104
Would it make sense to make taskInfo a pass-by-value param, forcing the
copy at the call?
That unfortunately changes the module API
On April 7, 2015, 1:41 a.m., Adam B wrote:
Minor suggestions.
Thanks for the review Adam!
- Niklas
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30961/#review79150
On March 30, 2015, 3:44 a.m., Adam B wrote:
src/slave/slave.cpp, line 1173
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31016/diff/3/?file=894746#file894746line1173
+1 to introducing this as high up in the method as possible, to reduce
risk of using the wrong taskInfo in future nearby calls.
On Feb. 22, 2015, 4:48 p.m., Kapil Arya wrote:
src/slave/slave.cpp, line
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31016/diff/1/?file=863935#file863935line
Can we instead swap its name with `task_` and move the label decorator
higher (right after entry into this function)?
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32948/
---
(Updated April 7, 2015, 5:57 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Adam B and Kapil
On April 8, 2015, 1:13 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp, line 2048
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32939/diff/1/?file=920067#file920067line2048
While you're here, how about:
```
VLOG(2) Dropping event for process: to;
```
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32956/#review79297
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [32956]
All tests passed.
-
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32955/#review79294
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [32955]
All tests passed.
-
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32939/#review79288
---
Ship it!
3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32955/
---
Review request for mesos, Ian Downes and Jie Yu.
Bugs: mesos-2573
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32956/
---
Review request for mesos, Ian Downes and Jie Yu.
Bugs: mesos-2573
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32954/
---
Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
Repository: mesos
Description
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32954/#review79295
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [32954]
All tests passed.
-
66 matches
Mail list logo
