Yeah sure, my biggest qualm was the new interface not being implemented. I
will reverse the calls and upload the new diff.


On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 11:45 PM, Kishore Gopalakrishna <[email protected]
> wrote:

>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/18167/#review34590
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Thanks Sandeep for finding the issue and taking a stab at this. I think it
> might be better to reverse the calls and default implementations. Only add
> onInstaceConfigChange method and call the existing onConfigChange method.
> The reason is I think we might have to support additional ConfigChange
> listeners such as ClusterConfigChangeListener, ResourceConfigChangeLister
> that will simply invoke onConfigChange.
> What do you think ?
>
> - Kishore Gopalakrishna
>
>
> On Feb. 16, 2014, 7:28 a.m., Sandeep Nayak wrote:
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------
> > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/18167/
> > -----------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > (Updated Feb. 16, 2014, 7:28 a.m.)
> >
> >
> > Review request for helix.
> >
> >
> > Bugs: HELIX-382
> >
> >
> > Repository: helix-git
> >
> >
> > Description
> > -------
> >
> > commit 4c792fd2908cbf8cbfe051dbe31f25bf0a1094df
> > Author: Sandeep Nayak <[email protected]>
> > Date:   Sat Feb 15 23:25:15 2014 -0800
> >
> >     [HELIX-382] GenericHelixController now implements
> InstanceConfigChangeListener, ConfigChangeListener delegates call to
> InstanceConfigChangeListener
> >
> > :100644 100644 e9924a2... 9481802... M
>  
> helix-core/src/main/java/org/apache/helix/controller/GenericHelixController.java
> >
> >
> > Diffs
> > -----
> >
> >
> helix-core/src/main/java/org/apache/helix/controller/GenericHelixController.java
> e9924a2
> >
> > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/18167/diff/
> >
> >
> > Testing
> > -------
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Sandeep Nayak
> >
> >
>
>

Reply via email to