----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/20284/#review40342 -----------------------------------------------------------
RBTools 0.5.4 released 3 months ago, so with this change, we'll depends on a quite new version of RBTools. This is generally not OK for distro packages. I'd like to keep use post-review, if not found (in the incoming RBTools 0.6.x, which will be obsolete as it says), then try rbt. Another comment for this patch is the comments in file head should be updated too, it still says something about *post-review* rather than *rbt*. - Chengwei Yang On April 13, 2014, 5:34 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/20284/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated April 13, 2014, 5:34 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Timothy St. Clair. > > > Bugs: MESOS-931 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-931 > > > Repository: mesos-git > > > Description > ------- > > Note, for 'rbt post' to work correctly with revision ranges RBTools 0.5.4 or > higher is needed. > > > Diffs > ----- > > support/post-reviews.py 602e6600e65d2b122a2314694f6969a27b840c5d > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/20284/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Used it post this review. > > > Thanks, > > Vinod Kone > >
