-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/47198/#review132823
-----------------------------------------------------------




include/mesos/docker/v1.proto (lines 53 - 54)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/47198/#comment197076>

    I don't think you need this comment. To me `mesos` labels are completely 
independent from `docker` labels (even though they happen to have similar 
signatures).



include/mesos/docker/v1.proto (lines 60 - 63)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/47198/#comment197078>

    I still don't understand this comment.
    
    Are you saying that all of the other fields in this protobuf can be parsed 
automatically, but this field is special and cannot?
    
    If so, what makes it special, and why can't it be parsed automatically like 
the others?  That's what would be more interesting to me in the comment.


- Kevin Klues


On May 12, 2016, 3:56 a.m., Gilbert Song wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/47198/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated May 12, 2016, 3:56 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler, Artem Harutyunyan, Jie Yu, and Kevin 
> Klues.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-5272
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-5272
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Added labels to docker v1 spec config.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   include/mesos/docker/v1.proto ff18f8cadfce3315467f194d50d3469fa839f686 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/47198/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Gilbert Song
> 
>

Reply via email to