On May 14, 2015, 9:39 a.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?
Kapil Arya wrote:
Without this we would have to use qualify HookExecuted with
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
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
---
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/29947/
---
(Updated May 13, 2015, 4:36 p.m.)
Review request for mesos and Niklas Nielsen.
