----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/64521/#review193598 -----------------------------------------------------------
src/status_update_manager/status_update_manager_process.hpp Lines 513-514 (original), 511-514 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/64521/#comment272168> Let's add a `CHECK_NOTNULL(stream);` here as well. src/status_update_manager/status_update_manager_process.hpp Lines 513 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/64521/#comment272164> AFAICT there's nothing preventing somebody from setting `latest_status` on an update they pass into this process, causing us to fail this check? src/tests/offer_operation_status_update_manager_tests.cpp Lines 906-916 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/64521/#comment272173> Since we test this functionality elsewhere, we can remove this block. - Greg Mann On Dec. 12, 2017, 1:47 a.m., Gaston Kleiman wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/64521/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Dec. 12, 2017, 1:47 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Chun-Hung Hsiao, Greg Mann, and Jie Yu. > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Made `StatusUpdateManagerProcess` fill-in the latest status update. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/status_update_manager/status_update_manager_process.hpp > 1ac64410594134ce3e709d396d0a74a3d0aa2007 > src/tests/offer_operation_status_update_manager_tests.cpp > a5327d3d070a390f2ceb918dc53a024fbfe8777e > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/64521/diff/2/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Added a new test, which passes on GNU/Linux. The other existing tests also > pass. > > > Thanks, > > Gaston Kleiman > >
