> On Feb. 27, 2016, 2:08 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote: > > src/tests/scheduler_tests.cpp, line 136 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/43664/diff/2/?file=1253297#file1253297line136> > > > > why will there be future invocations? > > Vinod Kone wrote: > I see the reasoning in the next review. Maybe move this particular change > to that review?
Sounds good, discarding this review and merging it with r43667 - Anand ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/43664/#review121048 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Feb. 17, 2016, 10:45 p.m., Anand Mazumdar wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/43664/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Feb. 17, 2016, 10:45 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone. > > > Bugs: MESOS-3570 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3570 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > This change modifies the existing `SchedulerTest.Subscribe` to just test if > we are able to subscribe with the master instead of also testing for > scheduler failover. > > Added a `TODO` to add a separate test for testing scheduler failover once > MESOS-3339 is resolved. The reasoning for doing so was that the callback > interface would simplify writing the test. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/tests/scheduler_tests.cpp 37f17094b3f11fd02468bf51b51b8e65ccb350a9 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/43664/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Anand Mazumdar > >