Current process makes sure bad code does not get in … though not sure of
this swap ...

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Vinod Kone <vinodk...@apache.org> wrote:

> We really need to swap steps 4 (well the assigning part) and 6 in the
> "submitting
> a patch <http://mesos.apache.org/documentation/latest/submitting-a-patch/
> >"
> link. I would love for new users to first find a shepherd, discuss the
> problem/solution *before* assigning the ticket to themselves.
>
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Abhishek Dasgupta <
> a10gu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Disha,
> > Welcome to mesos community. First of all, if you want to work on
> > MESOS-4386, you need to assign yourself the ticket. So go through all the
> > necessary steps of
> >
> > http://mesos.apache.org/documentation/latest/submitting-a-patch/  for
> > that.
> >
> > I think, if you check this source file (src/master/flags.cpp) and look
> for
> > authenticate_frameworks, you might get a hint on resolving the issue.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Abhishek Dasgupta
> >
> >
> >
> > On Saturday 16 January 2016 12:05 AM, Disha Singh wrote:
> >
> >> Yes,It does. If you could tell me where these flags are and where I
> should
> >> add them . I tried to figure it out in the git repository :
> >> https://github.com/apache/mesos
> >>
> >> But unfortunately could not.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:45 PM, Vinod Kone <vinodk...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Disha,
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for asking.
> >>>
> >>> We cannot just rename the `authenticate` flag to
> >>> `authenticate_frameworks`
> >>> because that will break users who are already setting that flag, when
> >>> they
> >>> upgrade to the new version (that has this change). We always strive to
> do
> >>> backwards compatible changes.
> >>>
> >>> The first step is to add a new flag called `authenticate_frameworks`
> flag
> >>> and make sure the master does the same thing as when `authenticate`
> flag
> >>> is
> >>> set. As part of this we need to 1) send an email to dev/user mailing
> >>> lists
> >>> that this deprecation is coming and 2) update the CHANGELOG. Lets say
> >>> this
> >>> all happens in the 0.28 release. After a few releases (to give
> >>> users/operators enough time), we can remove the `authenticate` flag.
> >>>
> >>> Does that make sense?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Disha Singh <
> directionsta...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> MESOS-4386 says :
> >>>>
> >>>> <<<<<<<To be consistent with `authenticate_slaves` and
> >>>>
> >>> `authenticate_http`
> >>>
> >>>> flags, we should rename `authenticate` to `authenticate_frameworks`
> >>>> flag.
> >>>>
> >>>> This should be done via deprecation cycle.
> >>>>
> >>>> 1) Release X supports both `authenticate` and
> `authenticate_frameworks`
> >>>> flags
> >>>>
> >>>> 2) Release X + n supports only `authenticate_frameworks` flag.>>>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>   How should I move ahead with resolving it ? Does it simply mean
> >>>> changing
> >>>> the word "authenticate" to authenticate frameworks ? I am a newbie
> >>>>
> >>> .Please
> >>>
> >>>> help. :)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:07 PM, Artem Harutyunyan <
> >>>> ar...@mesosphere.io
> >>>>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Done. Welcome to Mesos community!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Disha Singh <
> >>>>>
> >>>> directionsta...@gmail.com>
> >>>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Please add me to the list of Mesos contributors. I would like to
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> submit a
> >>>>
> >>>>> code review for the following JIRA:
> >>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4386>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> > --
> >   Regards,
> >
> >
> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >   Abhishek Dasgupta
> >   Linux Software Developer - Linux Technology Centre
> >   IBM Systems Lab,
> >   IBM India Pvt. Ltd.
> >   Embassy Golf Link, D Block
> >   Koramongala - Off Indiranagar Ring Road
> >   Bangalore - 560 071
> >   Mobile: +91-8884107981
> >
> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to