-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/54727/#review159088
-----------------------------------------------------------



LGTM, minus a comment around the helper function naming.


src/tests/containerizer/io_switchboard_tests.cpp (lines 91 - 115)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/54727/#comment230043>

    hmm, I imagine us having a client for the Operator API in the future. If it 
has the same interface as the scheduler/executor library, it would be more 
suited if we rename this function to ease the transition in the future:
    
    ```cpp
    Future<http::Response> send(
        const Call& call,
        http::Connection connection);
    ```
    
    Also, we would have helpers e.g., `createAttachOutputCall()` etc. similar 
to what we have for the Scheduler API (`createAcceptCall()`)


- Anand Mazumdar


On Dec. 14, 2016, 12:46 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/54727/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Dec. 14, 2016, 12:46 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Anand Mazumdar and Kevin Klues.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Pulled out some code into helpers that can be re-used in other tests.
> I plan to use them in subsequent patches.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/tests/containerizer/io_switchboard_tests.cpp 
> 5bd9dc4a776fe8a0d04ed31aa167f10c394984e6 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/54727/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make -j20 check GTEST_FILTER="*Switchboard*" MESOS_VERBOSE=1
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Vinod Kone
> 
>

Reply via email to