Modified: mesos/site/source/documentation/latest/committers-guide.md URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/mesos/site/source/documentation/latest/committers-guide.md?rev=1630961&r1=1630960&r2=1630961&view=diff ============================================================================== --- mesos/site/source/documentation/latest/committers-guide.md (original) +++ mesos/site/source/documentation/latest/committers-guide.md Fri Oct 10 19:20:34 2014 @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -Committer's Guide +# Committer's Guide This is an attempt to capture the "etiquette" that we've informally used with Review Board and committing. A lot of this is obvious and @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ comprehensive and pedantic. ------------------------------------------------------------------ -(1) Wait for a 'ship it'. We often use the original developer or +**(1)** **Wait for a 'ship it'**. We often use the original developer or current "custodian" of some particular code to be the reviewer and add others to get more feedback or as an FYI. Feel free to explicitly call out that you're adding some people just as an FYI in the @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ to one another about a particular change coding. A little context goes a long way to streamlining the review process. -(2) Resolve issues before committing. We tend to give a 'ship it' even +**(2)** **Resolve issues before committing**. We tend to give a 'ship it' even when we think there are some issues that need correcting. Sometimes a particular issue will require more discussion and sometimes we take that discussion to IM or IRC or emails to expedite the process. It's @@ -25,22 +25,22 @@ collaborations/discussions that happened discussion public also helps involve others that would have liked to get involved but weren't invited. -If the reviewer and reviewee are having problems resolving a +**(2.1)** If the reviewer and reviewee are having problems resolving a particular "confrontational" issue then both parties should consider asking another reviewer to participate. We're all here to build the highest quality code possible, and we should leverage one another to do so. -(2.1) When an issue is "Dropped" by the reviewee, the expectation is +**(2.2)** When an issue is "Dropped" by the reviewee, the expectation is that there is a reply to the issue indicating why it was dropped. A silent "Drop" is very ambiguous. -(2.2) If an issue is marked as "Resolved", the expectation is that the +**(2.3)** If an issue is marked as "Resolved", the expectation is that the diff has been updated in accordance (more or less) with the reviewer's comment. If there are significant changes, a reply to the issue with a comment is greatly appreciated. -(3) Be patient, thoughtful, and respectful when providing (a) feedback +**(3)** **Be patient, thoughtful, and respectful** when providing (a) feedback on reviews and (b) commenting on feedback. This is not meant to be a sparring match. A prerequisite to being a good reviewee is acknowledging that 'writing is hard'! The reviewee should give the @@ -54,13 +54,13 @@ for giving hasty feedback. The reviewer trying to explain their concerns clearly and carefully. It's a two-way street! -(4) Be explicit about asking for more feedback. Feel free to update +**(4)** **Be explicit about asking for more feedback.** Feel free to update reviews as often as you like but recognize that in many cases it's ambiguous for reviewers when a review is back into a "ready" state so the reviewee should feel free to ping the reviewers via email when they're ready. -(5) Follow the format of commit messages. The three important bits are +**(5)** **Follow the format of commit messages.** The three important bits are (a) be clear and explicit in the commit message and (b) include the link to the review and (c) use 72 character columns. See support/apply-review.sh for committing someone else's code (it will @@ -70,10 +70,10 @@ which can be omitted). Note that we don' or less summary because that restriction tends to cause people to write poorly. -(6) Never ever commit a merge. Rebase as appropriate. Likewise, never +**(6)** **Never ever commit a merge.** Rebase as appropriate. Likewise, never 'force push'. -(7) Don't break the build. People use Linux and Mac OS X, be +**(7)** **Don't break the build.** People use Linux and Mac OS X, be thoughtful about doing a 'make check' on both before committing your code. In the future we hope to have Jenkins running builds of our reviews as well as our commits and not allowing code to be committed
Modified: mesos/site/source/documentation/latest/configuration.md URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/mesos/site/source/documentation/latest/configuration.md?rev=1630961&r1=1630960&r2=1630961&view=diff ============================================================================== --- mesos/site/source/documentation/latest/configuration.md (original) +++ mesos/site/source/documentation/latest/configuration.md Fri Oct 10 19:20:34 2014 @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ If you have special compilation requirem between a given user's frameworks. Options are the same as for user_allocator. (default: drf) --hostname=VALUE The hostname the master should advertise in ZooKeeper. - If left unset, system hostname will be used (recommended). + If left unset, the hostname is resolved from the IP address that the master binds to. --[no-]log_auto_initialize Whether to automatically initialize the replicated log used for the registry. If this is set to false, the log has to be manually initialized when used for the very first time. (default: true) @@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ If you have special compilation requirem environment or find hadoop on PATH) (default: ) --hostname=VALUE The hostname the slave should report. - If left unset, system hostname will be used (recommended). + If left unset, the hostname is resolved from the IP address that the slave binds to. --isolation=VALUE Isolation mechanisms to use, e.g., 'posix/cpu,posix/mem' or 'cgroups/cpu,cgroups/mem' or 'external'. (default: posix/cpu,posix/mem)
