> On Feb. 10, 2017, 2:42 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote: > > src/tests/check_tests.cpp > > Lines 73 (patched) > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/56213/diff/3/?file=1627707#file1627707line73> > > > > Any particular reason for using v1 scheduler API? The general > > recommendation has been to use v0 scheduler API unless you are testing v1 > > features. The main reason being most users are still using v0 scheduler API.
My original intention was to use unversioned HTTP API. However, I didn't figure out how to do this and I suspect that it is not even possible. Is it correct, that there are two choices? 1) use older driver-based API 2) use newer v1 HTTP API Is the recommendation then to use older driver-based API in tests? - Alexander ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/56213/#review165049 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Feb. 28, 2017, 3:55 p.m., Alexander Rukletsov wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/56213/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Feb. 28, 2017, 3:55 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Gastón Kleiman and Vinod Kone. > > > Bugs: MESOS-6906 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-6906 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > See summary. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/tests/check_tests.cpp b5a5d8e80c80b480992a3c8160ee7d0e4443111c > src/tests/mesos.hpp b450a04dfbf3bbeeb6b605fb78097dca390cbdbe > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/56213/diff/3/ > > > Testing > ------- > > See https://reviews.apache.org/r/56218/ > > > Thanks, > > Alexander Rukletsov > >
