----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/58964/#review176641 -----------------------------------------------------------
docs/authorization.md Lines 290 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/58964/#comment250012> s/my mesos/by Mesos/ docs/authorization.md Lines 298 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/58964/#comment250013> s/my mesos/by Mesos/ docs/authorization.md Lines 306 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/58964/#comment250014> s/in a/on a/ docs/authorization.md Lines 313 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/58964/#comment250039> s/use types/use the types/ docs/authorization.md Lines 316 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/58964/#comment250015> s/in a/on a/ docs/authorization.md Lines 321 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/58964/#comment250040> s/use types/use the types/ src/authorizer/local/authorizer.cpp Line 661 (original) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/58964/#comment250016> Thanks for fixing those. src/tests/authorization_tests.cpp Lines 4947 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/58964/#comment250018> Can we have a short leading comment on all the new tests please? I do understand it wont add huge value but I like having those in general - without exceptions. src/tests/authorization_tests.cpp Lines 4972 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/58964/#comment250054> The term "whitelist" confuses me - especially given that we are now using quotes for both, principals as well as something like semantic matches. Maybe the following would be less irritating? ``` // "foo" should be allowed to update the schedule. ``` Can you update all others accordingly please? src/tests/authorization_tests.cpp Lines 4981 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/58964/#comment250055> ``` // "bar" should not be allowed to update the schedule. ``` - Till Toenshoff On June 1, 2017, 2:56 p.m., Alexander Rojas wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/58964/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated June 1, 2017, 2:56 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Adam B, Greg Mann, and Till Toenshoff. > > > Bugs: MESOS-7415 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-7415 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Adds the actions `UPDATE_MAINTENANCE_SCHEDULE`, > `GET_MAINTENANCE_SCHEDULE`, `START_MAINTENANCE`, > `STOP_MAINTENANCE` and `GET_MAINTENANCE_STATUS` to the authorizer > API as well as the necesary code to handle these new actions. > > While the interface `mesos::Authorizer` takes an object with type > `MachineID` to perform authorization; the default implementation of > the interface `mesos::LocalAuthorizer` ignores the object choosing > the semantics of allow maintenance on all nodes or none. This was done > to extend the capacities of custom authorizers which may have special > rules for authorization. > > > Diffs > ----- > > docs/authorization.md d94f0f9d142e66118b89ecac28b9a4b21e88b6c8 > include/mesos/authorizer/acls.proto > ae0b1ea2e6417d186b1606542d75f3a20e0811db > include/mesos/authorizer/authorizer.hpp > 4a7376fb6ca2be0a513ad54f56eea3cf8cdd024d > include/mesos/authorizer/authorizer.proto > c9184d151befa4cea9bdebb36a315c760e6424b2 > src/authorizer/local/authorizer.cpp > 89aaf4b712d337d519445c922606789c334e5101 > src/tests/authorization_tests.cpp 32aa6ac4db7854507127ea2fb88b3e92daa277c0 > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/58964/diff/5/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Alexander Rojas > >
