-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31130/#review72802
-----------------------------------------------------------


The patch looks good for most part. However, if committed in its current form 
it will require some minor touch in future. To avoid this further works, it 
will be great if we can split the tests that validate with both prism and 
falcon server. One of the split can work with falcon prism and will be 
applicatble for both embedded and distributed mode. The second split will test 
only with falcon server and will be applicable for mode. All these tests can 
stay in the same file. The tests that are applicable only in distributed mode 
need to have "distributed" in the list of groups the groups and the tests that 
are applicable in both distributed and embedded mode need to have only 
"embedded" in the list of groups. Makes sense ?

- Raghav Gautam


On Feb. 17, 2015, 12:33 p.m., Karishma Gulati wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/31130/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Feb. 17, 2015, 12:33 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Falcon.
> 
> 
> Repository: falcon-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Adding test for validate API. No tests exist currently in the suite. Also 
> validate has been exposed via server too, as part of 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-921. So tested this 
> functionality as well.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   
> falcon-regression/merlin-core/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/regression/core/helpers/entity/AbstractEntityHelper.java
>  e11b37d 
>   
> falcon-regression/merlin/src/test/java/org/apache/falcon/regression/ValidateAPIPrismAndServerTest.java
>  PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/31130/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Added test ValidateAPIPrismAndServerTest
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Karishma Gulati
> 
>

Reply via email to