---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/16423/#review31615
---
Sorry about the merge glitches; that was sloppy of me. I shouldn't
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/16615/#review31636
---
In the interest of avoiding a proliferation of broken documentation
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/16528/
---
(Updated Jan. 13, 2014, 7:32 p.m.)
Review request for Aurora and Bill Farner.
On Jan. 13, 2014, 7:27 p.m., Kevin Sweeney wrote:
In the interest of avoiding a proliferation of broken documentation
links/links to drafts, would everyone be all right with committing this
as-is and continuing to iterate in later reviews? Normally I prefer to
review small changes in
On Jan. 13, 2014, 7:27 p.m., Kevin Sweeney wrote:
In the interest of avoiding a proliferation of broken documentation
links/links to drafts, would everyone be all right with committing this
as-is and continuing to iterate in later reviews? Normally I prefer to
review small changes in
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/16423/#review31650
---
src/main/python/apache/aurora/client/cli/__init__.py
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/16423/
---
(Updated Jan. 13, 2014, 5:28 p.m.)
Review request for Aurora, Jonathan Boulle
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/16629/#review31664
---
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/16740/#review31667
---
Post-weekend ping. Waiting on Kevin and Suman here.
- Bill Farner
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/16834/#review31675
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Kevin Sweeney
On Jan. 13, 2014, 3:34 p.m.,
On Jan. 13, 2014, 7:27 p.m., Kevin Sweeney wrote:
In the interest of avoiding a proliferation of broken documentation
links/links to drafts, would everyone be all right with committing this
as-is and continuing to iterate in later reviews? Normally I prefer to
review small changes in
On Jan. 13, 2014, 10:58 p.m., Bill Farner wrote:
src/main/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/quota/QuotaComparisonResult.java,
line 62
https://reviews.apache.org/r/16629/diff/4/?file=420261#file420261line62
This makes the details field kind of lame. How about OptionalString
to
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/16629/
---
(Updated Jan. 14, 2014, 2:03 a.m.)
Review request for Aurora, Kevin Sweeney
13 matches
Mail list logo