----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10438/#review19277 -----------------------------------------------------------
Ship it! src/slave/status_update_manager.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10438/#comment39933> I'm going to defer on this, but we should come up with a better naming scheme or signatures that indicate clearly the difference between these two. src/slave/status_update_manager.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10438/#comment39934> const? - Ben Mahler On April 16, 2013, 12:31 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/10438/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated April 16, 2013, 12:31 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Ben Mahler. > > > Description > ------- > > This was split off https://reviews.apache.org/r/10142/. > > While I simplified statusUpdate() and StatusUpdateManager a lot, this diff > introduced quite a few changes. > > So, I will leave it up to you, to take another look. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/slave/slave.cpp 325231458a6883019436e7cc5a37f85f0f5735fa > src/slave/status_update_manager.hpp > e6ca40c5c05c0952cf76fb1db7eff2e4270c0d24 > src/slave/status_update_manager.cpp > 044d245f370ef23ddc67fadbf7f8fe9d75dd662a > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10438/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Vinod Kone > >
