----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/41380/#review110939 -----------------------------------------------------------
Please explain (the intended use of) instance_port better. Otherwise shippable. include/mesos/mesos.proto (line 1577) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/41380/#comment170949> When/why/how would it be different from the port number? Please give a clearer example. If it would help the explanation to have `number` and `instance_port` next to each other, you can put `instance_port` just below `number`. The ordering in the protobuf definition doesn't matter, since it's the `= 6` fieldId that determines order over the wire. include/mesos/mesos.proto (lines 1615 - 1616) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/41380/#comment170953> Please add this comment above the vips field, rather than bloating the message-level comment further. Comments that only talk about a single field don't have a reason to be at the top-level. include/mesos/mesos.proto (lines 1617 - 1618) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/41380/#comment170951> Fix wrapping - Adam B On Dec. 17, 2015, 1:33 a.m., Avinash sridharan wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/41380/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Dec. 17, 2015, 1:33 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Adam B and Anand Mazumdar. > > > Bugs: MESOS-4114 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4114 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Added repeated vip field to DiscoveryInfo and an instance_port field to Port > > > Diffs > ----- > > include/mesos/mesos.proto 8ca213062c480f0266ffc51a621eb4a118140c77 > include/mesos/v1/mesos.proto 8f357b0fb778098ec66ac85d174bdd7e387954b5 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/41380/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check, and make > > > Thanks, > > Avinash sridharan > >
