----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/26827/#review57026 -----------------------------------------------------------
Ship it! Thanks! I'll get this committed shortly. support/verify-reviews.py <https://reviews.apache.org/r/26827/#comment97487> We probably shouldn't still be saying "Now apply this review and then say skip it. I'll adjust this for you since it's pretty trivial. :) Remember to end comments with periods and avoid squashing blocks together without whitespace (line 83 and 84). - Ben Mahler On Oct. 16, 2014, 9:37 p.m., Cody Maloney wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/26827/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Oct. 16, 2014, 9:37 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos and Ben Mahler. > > > Bugs: MESOS-1881 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1881 > > > Repository: mesos-git > > > Description > ------- > > If the status is submitted, don't actually apply the review. > > We still recurse throuhg it for dependent reviews so we get any open reviews > in a chain (although open -> submitted -> open should be uncommon in our > workflow). > > > Diffs > ----- > > support/verify-reviews.py 9408747995db4b78ac6edd74995a05ab0355f1df > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/26827/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Ran locally (With result posting + building disabled), adding a print > statement when a review in the dependency set was skipped because it was > submitted: > > Sample output: > ``` > Checking if review: 26071 needs verification > Skipping blocking review 26071 > Checking if review: 26727 needs verification > Skipping blocking review 26727 > Checking if review: 26796 needs verification > Skipping blocking review 26796 > Checking if review: 26797 needs verification > Latest diff timestamp: 2014-10-16 19:16:26 > Latest dependency change timestamp: 2014-10-16 19:23:07 > Verifying review 26797 > Dependent review: https://reviews.apache.org/api/review-requests/26796/ > Dependent review: https://reviews.apache.org/api/review-requests/26727/ > Dependent review: https://reviews.apache.org/api/review-requests/26071/ > Dependent review: https://reviews.apache.org/api/review-requests/26789/ > Dependent review: https://reviews.apache.org/api/review-requests/26674/ > Skipping submitted review 26674 > Skipping submitted review 26789 > Dependent review: https://reviews.apache.org/api/review-requests/26791/ > Skipping submitted review 26791 > Applying review 26071 > ./support/apply-review.sh -n -r 26071 > Applying review 26727 > ./support/apply-review.sh -n -r 26727 > Posting review: Bad patch! > > Reviews applied: [26674, 26789, 26791, 26071, 26727] > > Failed command: ./support/apply-review.sh -n -r 26727 > > Error: > --2014-10-16 14:34:43-- https://reviews.apache.org/r/26727/diff/raw/ > Resolving reviews.apache.org... 140.211.11.74 > Connecting to reviews.apache.org|140.211.11.74|:443... connected. > HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK > Length: 1574 (1.5K) [text/x-patch] > Saving to: '26727.patch' > > 0K . 100% 34.9M=0s > > 2014-10-16 14:34:43 (34.9 MB/s) - '26727.patch' saved [1574/1574] > > error: patch failed: src/module/manager.hpp:89 > error: src/module/manager.hpp: patch does not apply > Failed to apply patch > > ``` > > > Thanks, > > Cody Maloney > >
