-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30389/#review70248
-----------------------------------------------------------



src/test/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/thrift/SchedulerThriftInterfaceTest.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/30389/#comment115326>

    Why is this change necessary?



src/test/python/apache/aurora/client/cli/test_update.py
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/30389/#comment115328>

    There has been some previous discussion that this style of test brittle and 
we should avoid it. Would you mind moving this test up to the 
"TestJobUpdateCommand" suite at the top of this file?
    
    This test could then be modified to have minimal patching.


- Zameer Manji


On Jan. 29, 2015, 9:13 a.m., Bill Farner wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/30389/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 29, 2015, 9:13 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Aurora, Maxim Khutornenko and Zameer Manji.
> 
> 
> Bugs: AURORA-330
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-330
> 
> 
> Repository: aurora
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Deny attempts to create a job update with a non-service job.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   
> src/main/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/thrift/SchedulerThriftInterface.java
>  8c19f3b08135eb5f3098591ebf9931b42a086318 
>   src/main/python/apache/aurora/client/cli/jobs.py 
> 7c5374417f8cca7400c7e92d014f706c0b2368fd 
>   
> src/test/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/thrift/SchedulerThriftInterfaceTest.java
>  03d1fba76c23570c2c4102a48daf5ce035ecaaa3 
>   src/test/python/apache/aurora/client/cli/test_update.py 
> c470ee64f11b5a1e4ce8cf1635c1acd2ec6e6e40 
>   src/test/python/apache/aurora/client/cli/util.py 
> 5b6207d45eba9ecc24cfd6dc5910677f9bc44372 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/30389/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bill Farner
> 
>

Reply via email to