> On Feb. 3, 2014, 8:38 p.m., Kevin Sweeney wrote:
> > src/main/python/apache/aurora/client/BUILD, line 68
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/17056/diff/1/?file=427145#file427145line68>
> >
> >     I'm unclear on the convention being followed for -packaged 
> > dependencies. Wouldn't this be automatic if 
> > src/main/python/apache/aurora/config has a provides statement?

I forget the reason that I split out some dependencies into separate -packaged 
versions -- I believe it had something to do with untangling some challenging 
dependencies.  Likely it has something to do with building-from-source pulling 
in too much stuff vs building from artifacts.  We should probably file a ticket 
to merge them together (or at least document why they're the way they are -- 
and make them completely consistent.)


- Brian


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/17056/#review33495
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Jan. 17, 2014, 6:37 p.m., Brian Wickman wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/17056/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 17, 2014, 6:37 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Aurora and Kevin Sweeney.
> 
> 
> Repository: aurora
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> When testing the updated pants setup_py, I noticed that some extra junk was 
> being added to the apache.aurora.common sdist (the generated thrift code from 
> apache.gen.aurora.)  This fixes those dependencies.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/main/python/apache/aurora/client/BUILD 
> a603ee5d171c828700a9ac6836afb22a03638eff 
>   src/main/python/apache/aurora/common/BUILD 
> ae0f40741dbe0a2156c1cf7534f5b2e48ca2bb65 
>   src/main/python/apache/thermos/core/BUILD 
> d5734b11ae59757611483401ab40495c60e12f11 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/17056/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Brian Wickman
> 
>

Reply via email to