---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45193/#review125678
---
Ship it!
- Bill Farner
On March 28, 2016, 8:33 a.m., John
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45193/#review125657
---
Ship it!
Master (83a078b) is green with this patch.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45193/#review125644
---
Bill - I'll take silence as consent and merge this today.
- John
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45193/
---
(Updated March 28, 2016, 9:33 a.m.)
Review request for Aurora, David Chung,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45193/#review125643
---
Rebasing to pick up https://reviews.apache.org/r/45366/
- John
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45193/#review125271
---
Bill - this has changed enough that you should re-assess your
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45193/#review125270
---
Ship it!
Master (9927231) is green with this patch.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45193/#review125265
---
@ReviewBot retry
- John Sirois
On March 24, 2016, 8:52 a.m.,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45193/#review125262
---
Ship it!
The ripples into the scheduler code was a little bit
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45193/#review125261
---
Master (9927231) is red with this patch.
> On March 23, 2016, 1:36 p.m., Zameer Manji wrote:
> > I am in favor of making this change. However, it seems this patch could be
> > improved because the storage layer has to now check for both `null` and
> > empty collection.
> >
> > I think a better solution would be to change Query.Builder
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45193/
---
(Updated March 24, 2016, 8:52 a.m.)
Review request for Aurora, David Chung,
> On March 23, 2016, 1:36 p.m., Zameer Manji wrote:
> > I am in favor of making this change. However, it seems this patch could be
> > improved because the storage layer has to now check for both `null` and
> > empty collection.
> >
> > I think a better solution would be to change Query.Builder
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45193/#review125102
---
I am in favor of making this change. However, it seems this patch
> On March 23, 2016, 8:35 a.m., John Sirois wrote:
> > I think this change stands on its own aside from the current state of the
> > generated Go thrift bindings, but there has been a good deal of discussion
> > about those bindings offline. Some homework below.
> >
> > For the case of the
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45193/
---
(Updated March 23, 2016, 10:35 a.m.)
Review request for Aurora, David Chung,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45193/#review125024
---
I think this change stands on its own aside from the current
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45193/#review124954
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Bill Farner
On March 22, 2016, 7:32
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45193/
---
(Updated March 22, 2016, 8:32 p.m.)
Review request for Aurora, David Chung,
19 matches
Mail list logo