Re: Review Request 63236: Refactor veto logic to use direct method calls as opposed to pubsub events.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/63236/#review189213 --- Shipped to master, feel free to close this diff. - David

Re: Review Request 63236: Refactor veto logic to use direct method calls as opposed to pubsub events.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/63236/#review189211 --- Ship it! Master (f2755e1) is green with this patch.

Re: Review Request 63236: Refactor veto logic to use direct method calls as opposed to pubsub events.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/63236/ --- (Updated Oct. 25, 2017, 5:01 p.m.) Review request for Aurora and Bill Farner.

Re: Review Request 63236: Refactor veto logic to use direct method calls as opposed to pubsub events.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/63236/#review189152 --- Ship it! - Bill Farner On Oct. 24, 2017, 12:10 a.m., Jordan

Re: Review Request 63236: Refactor veto logic to use direct method calls as opposed to pubsub events.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/63236/#review189080 --- Ship it!

Re: Review Request 63236: Refactor veto logic to use direct method calls as opposed to pubsub events.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/63236/#review189031 --- Ship it! Master (a673c5b) is green with this patch.

Review Request 63236: Refactor veto logic to use direct method calls as opposed to pubsub events.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/63236/ --- Review request for Aurora and Bill Farner. Repository: aurora Description