> On Feb. 26, 2016, 9:38 p.m., Neil Conway wrote: > > 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/protobuf.hpp, line 625 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/43938/diff/1/?file=1267126#file1267126line625> > > > > Is this the best name for this type? Not sure there's a better name, > > but `JSON::Protobuf` doesn't necessarily imply to me that the type names a > > certain representation of `google::protobuf::Message`. What about > > `JSON::RawProtobuf`?
I'm not sure if it's the best name. At least at the call-site it seems ok to me. This is internal anyway, so we can always change it later :) - Michael ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/43938/#review120963 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Feb. 28, 2016, 2:17 a.m., Michael Park wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/43938/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Feb. 28, 2016, 2:17 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman, Joris Van Remoortere, and Neil > Conway. > > > Bugs: MESOS-4754 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4754 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Required jsonifying of generic protobuf to be explicit opt-in [stout]. > > > Diffs > ----- > > 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/protobuf.hpp > eb5502c4987da5593169a86b21f60c01aa5b5170 > 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/representation.hpp > 22f70f7536c6f5d24ff59228d8ba7bf41319fd4a > 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/protobuf_tests.cpp > 8dd9cfd3e7d1e3ab4ace87066a43a3094b776d82 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/43938/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > `make check` > > > Thanks, > > Michael Park > >
