> On Feb. 27, 2016, 11:17 a.m., Adam B wrote:
> > Looks good to me. I'm assuming you didn't change anything substantial in 
> > the implementation when you moved it. It looks the same to me.

Yes, I didn't change anything substantial in the implementation.


> On Feb. 27, 2016, 11:17 a.m., Adam B wrote:
> > src/Makefile.am, lines 630-631
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/43863/diff/1/?file=1264901#file1264901line630>
> >
> >     Do these need to be in separate files?

Yes, I think weights_handler.cpp only contains the logic to handle the http 
request, like quota and maintenance features, they all use the separated files. 
Maybe my mainly reason is better to keep consistent.


- Yongqiao


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/43863/#review121078
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Feb. 23, 2016, 2:18 a.m., Yongqiao Wang wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/43863/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Feb. 23, 2016, 2:18 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Adam B and Alexander Rukletsov.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-4214
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4214
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Move the implementation of updateWeights out of header.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/CMakeLists.txt 5cf0ec8c475839ad8717192a37f01546cbcccd7a 
>   src/Makefile.am 73e7ff06ba064c9b04f191009522d7808a7ab58e 
>   src/master/master.hpp 13c6ff153e77c527822309e787942eb463d59e7d 
>   src/master/master.cpp b453bc7fca05c192df616b7d80132985b3248547 
>   src/master/weights.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/master/weights.cpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/master/weights_handler.cpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/43863/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make && make check successfully!
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Yongqiao Wang
> 
>

Reply via email to