-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/59573/#review176066
-----------------------------------------------------------


Fix it, then Ship it!





ambari-server/src/test/java/org/apache/ambari/server/topology/validators/RequiredConfigPropertiesValidatorTest.java
Lines 148-149 (original), 150-151 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/59573/#comment249387>

    Collections.singletonList or Lists.newArrayList(elements ...) can be used 
in places like this.



ambari-server/src/test/java/org/apache/ambari/server/topology/validators/RequiredConfigPropertiesValidatorTest.java
Lines 206-207 (original), 208-209 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/59573/#comment249388>

    Why not use Sets.newTreeSet(...) instead?


- Jonathan Hurley


On May 25, 2017, 6:01 a.m., Laszlo Puskas wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/59573/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated May 25, 2017, 6:01 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Ambari, Attila Doroszlai, Jonathan Hurley, and Sandor 
> Magyari.
> 
> 
> Bugs: AMBARI-21126
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMBARI-21126
> 
> 
> Repository: ambari
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Assertions in the failing tests are mad on generated strings that were 
> different due to the (unordered) collections used to generate them.
> 
> Using sorted collections to make messages predictable.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   
> ambari-server/src/main/java/org/apache/ambari/server/topology/validators/RequiredConfigPropertiesValidator.java
>  759d9e9 
>   
> ambari-server/src/test/java/org/apache/ambari/server/topology/validators/RequiredConfigPropertiesValidatorTest.java
>  8ead623 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59573/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Unit tests running. (Both java 7 and 8)
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Laszlo Puskas
> 
>

Reply via email to