-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/53406/#review154712
-----------------------------------------------------------


Fix it, then Ship it!





src/tests/command_executor_tests.cpp (lines 217 - 219)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/53406/#comment224379>

    Backtick enum values, please



src/tests/command_executor_tests.cpp (line 259)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/53406/#comment224401>

    ash? : )



src/tests/command_executor_tests.cpp (line 262)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/53406/#comment224402>

    Love it, let's do it right after resolving the issue!



src/tests/command_executor_tests.cpp (lines 281 - 283)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/53406/#comment224412>

    That's why the test takes so long: we have to wait at least 5s to get the 
TASK_KILLED update. Lowering this timeout would probably cause flakiness on 
slow CI machines. What we would like to express, is "There is no TASK_RUNNING 
update after health check status changes". However, I'm fine keeping the 
current approach since it seems straightforward.


- Alexander Rukletsov


On Nov. 2, 2016, 10:06 p.m., Gastón Kleiman wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/53406/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Nov. 2, 2016, 10:06 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Alexander Rukletsov and Benjamin Mahler.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Add a test to ensure MESOS-6457 is fixed for the command executor.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/tests/command_executor_tests.cpp 
> 6e47243941626bb5b6224430f9a12ced8a3f5062 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/53406/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Verified that the test fails without 53378 on both macOS and Linux, but 
> passes with it.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Gastón Kleiman
> 
>

Reply via email to