-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/41291/#review117703
-----------------------------------------------------------




src/tests/scheduler_tests.cpp (line 201)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/41291/#comment178977>

    s/execCallbacks/executorCallbacks/



src/tests/scheduler_tests.cpp (lines 266 - 267)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/41291/#comment178978>

    this expectation should be set much later. sometime after #287?



src/tests/scheduler_tests.cpp (lines 297 - 299)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/41291/#comment178989>

    It would be gret if we can send a TASK_RUNNING update right from here, like 
we did with the driver based executor to minimize the boiler plate code needed 
for every test.
    
    This likely means that the ExecutorCallbacks class needs access to a 
pointer of TestMesos class.



src/tests/scheduler_tests.cpp (line 302)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/41291/#comment178979>

    s/exec/executor/



src/tests/scheduler_tests.cpp (line 360)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/41291/#comment178982>

    do the above changes for all the other tests below.


- Vinod Kone


On Jan. 22, 2016, 8:35 p.m., Anand Mazumdar wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/41291/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 22, 2016, 8:35 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and Vinod Kone.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-4457
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4457
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This change modifies the existing scheduler tests to use the new executor 
> HTTP library instead of the old driver based interface.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/tests/scheduler_tests.cpp 67432109c7df6be0aa76e94a03bd5b2e9c96d14e 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/41291/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Anand Mazumdar
> 
>

Reply via email to