> On Oct. 28, 2014, 11:49 p.m., Kapil Arya wrote:
> > We added a new module kind but didn't add any new tests.  Wouldn't it be 
> > better to move the authenticator example to the patch where we add the test 
> > case or the other way around?

Yes, that split is a bit "random" in some cases (there are more). I would still 
like to leave it as is to allow for smaller chunks in the reviews and to 
minimize repatching certain areas over multiple commits. All cram-md5 
authenticator patches have to be committed or none as noted above.


> On Oct. 28, 2014, 11:49 p.m., Kapil Arya wrote:
> > src/authentication/authenticator.hpp, line 24
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/26857/diff/5/?file=735280#file735280line24>
> >
> >     Shouldn't we also explicitly include <process/pid.h> (although it is 
> > being included indirectly by process/future.hpp).

Yes, well spotted.


> On Oct. 28, 2014, 11:49 p.m., Kapil Arya wrote:
> > src/authentication/authenticator.hpp, lines 19-20
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/26857/diff/5/?file=735280#file735280line19>
> >
> >     Shouldn't this be __AUTHENTICATION_AUTHENTICATOR_HPP__

I would like to leave it as is, following the example of the isolator. I think 
our current rule does not use the folder name unless we need to disambiguate.


> On Oct. 28, 2014, 11:49 p.m., Kapil Arya wrote:
> > src/examples/test_authenticator_module.cpp, lines 22-26
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/26857/diff/5/?file=735282#file735282line22>
> >
> >     The file module/authenticator.hpp is not part of this patch.  Shouldn't 
> > it be removed from  https://reviews.apache.org/r/26859/diff/# and added 
> > here? 
> >     
> >     Also, alphabetize please.

Yes, it slipped into the wrong RR.


- Till


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26857/#review58909
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Oct. 29, 2014, 3:03 p.m., Till Toenshoff wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/26857/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Oct. 29, 2014, 3:03 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Adam B, Benjamin Hindman, and Vinod Kone.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-1889
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1889
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Introducing the CRAM-MD5 SASL authenticator module based on the former 
> sasl/authenticator.
> 
> The former sasl/authenticator.hpp still remains as part of libmesos but now 
> is located at authentication/cram_md5.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/Makefile.am f177d87 
>   src/authentication/authenticator.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/authentication/cram_md5/authenticator.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/examples/test_authenticator_module.cpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/module/authenticator.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/module/manager.cpp 7a6c884 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/26857/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> NOTE all four CRAM-MD5 authenticator module related RRs need to get applied 
> before running make check.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Till Toenshoff
> 
>

Reply via email to