> On March 18, 2015, 12:27 a.m., Alexander Rukletsov wrote: > > include/mesos/mesos.proto, lines 412-415 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/32139/diff/1/?file=897014#file897014line412> > > > > Are you saying "Resources cannot be reserved for '*' role"? Or there is > > more information that it's hard for me to understand? > > > > Q about design: why a framework from role `'*'` cannot reserve > > resources?
My mistake. Frameworks with role "*" can reserve resources. I've fixed this comment and added a section regarding valid states and transitions of the (role, reservation) pair. - Michael ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/32139/#review76764 ----------------------------------------------------------- On March 18, 2015, 7:43 p.m., Michael Park wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/32139/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated March 18, 2015, 7:43 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Alexander Rukletsov, Ben Mahler, and Jie Yu. > > > Bugs: MESOS-2475 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2475 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > The beginning of `Resource::ReservationInfo`. This patch only introduces the > `framework_id` field. We don't need the required `principal` field yet and > will be introduced together with the "unreserve" ACLs. An optional `id` may > be introduced in the future as well. > > > Diffs > ----- > > include/mesos/mesos.proto ec8efaec13f54a56d82411f6cdbdb8ad8b103748 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/32139/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Michael Park > >
