---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/33514/#review83764
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [33513, 33514]
All tests
On May 14, 2015, 12:38 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
src/examples/test_hook_module.cpp, lines 146-150
https://reviews.apache.org/r/29947/diff/10/?file=958466#file958466line146
Looks a bit dense; can we break it up a bit?
Ideally, this whole block would be replaced by a single
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34225/#review83812
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Cody Maloney
On May 14, 2015, 6:21 p.m.,
On May 12, 2015, 9:45 a.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
Hey Kapil; what's blocking this patch?
Adam B wrote:
As part of the deprecation cycle, we need to wait until 0.24 for this
patch. All the relevant 0.23 patches have landed.
NOTE: This patch is only to be merged _ONLY_ after all
On Feb. 11, 2015, 5:27 a.m., Adam B wrote:
src/tests/hook_tests.cpp, lines 302-305
https://reviews.apache.org/r/29947/diff/7/?file=837751#file837751line302
Did you consider just sending an explicit ShutdownExecutorMessage from
the slave to the executor? Then you can wait around
On May 14, 2015, 12:39 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
src/examples/test_hook_module.cpp, line 37
https://reviews.apache.org/r/29947/diff/10/?file=958466#file958466line37
Why did you need this one?
Without this we would have to use qualify HookExecuted with `internal::`. (Note
that we
On April 22, 2015, 1:53 a.m., Adam B wrote:
docs/modules.md, lines 165-166
https://reviews.apache.org/r/33372/diff/2/?file=938440#file938440line165
I still think we need a note in upgrades.md since this is a hook API
change when upgrading.
Done :)
- Niklas
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/33372/#review83803
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [30961, 30962, 31016, 31028,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/29947/#review83786
---
Ship it!
Thanks Kapil! It looks SO much better!!
LGTM
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34136/#review83823
---
include/mesos/mesos.proto
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31505/#review83690
---
src/slave/containerizer/isolators/network/port_mapping.hpp
On May 14, 2015, 7:44 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
src/slave/containerizer/isolators/network/port_mapping.hpp, line 329
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31505/diff/5/?file=955871#file955871line329
Please add some comments about what this is. Consider using hashset
instead of std::set.
We
On May 14, 2015, 7:44 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
src/slave/containerizer/isolators/network/port_mapping.cpp, line 1767
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31505/diff/5/?file=955872#file955872line1767
No need to use `filter::` prefix for `filter::Filter` as it's already
included.
Without it I
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/33865/
---
(Updated May 14, 2015, 11:57 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Jie Yu, Joris Van
On May 7, 2015, 12:38 a.m., Jie Yu wrote:
include/mesos/mesos.proto, lines 454-458
https://reviews.apache.org/r/33865/diff/1/?file=950607#file950607line454
Chatted with Vinod offline (PS: Vinod is going to send out a summary of
the discussion).
In short,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34139/#review83825
---
src/slave/containerizer/provisioners/appc/discovery.hpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/29507/
---
(Updated May 14, 2015, 1:54 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/29507/
---
(Updated May 14, 2015, 3:01 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and
18 matches
Mail list logo
