----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52140/#review150104 -----------------------------------------------------------
docs/learn/documentation/versioned/operations/split-deployment.md (line 44) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52140/#comment217956> If it's not addressed here, I wonder if we should specify this in this doc? Let me know what you think. docs/learn/documentation/versioned/operations/split-deployment.md (line 46) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52140/#comment217957> Why is it `possibly` in the `future`? Seems like a lot of `ifs` ;-) Can't they do it currently by configuring these properties? docs/learn/documentation/versioned/operations/split-deployment.md (line 64) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52140/#comment217958> why are all line numberings `1`. Is this a typo or some `md` format I don't understand? docs/learn/documentation/versioned/operations/split-deployment.md (line 65) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52140/#comment217959> With the refactored code path, is this still the `SamzaAppMaster` class? docs/learn/documentation/versioned/operations/split-deployment.md (line 92) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52140/#comment217966> Should the user do anything to `add` this to the classpath? It was not clear from the doc. nit: typo in bellow s/bellow/below docs/learn/documentation/versioned/operations/split-deployment.md (line 99) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52140/#comment217963> nit-alert: /s/bellow/below docs/learn/documentation/versioned/operations/split-deployment.md (line 103) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52140/#comment217964> Maybe I missed something - What do you mean by path to the containers? Did you mean path to the framework instead? docs/learn/documentation/versioned/operations/split-deployment.md (line 105) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52140/#comment217965> It was not clear to me - what do you meant by old way? How about re-wording this like - `this will fall-back to the default way`? docs/learn/documentation/versioned/operations/split-deployment.md (line 120) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52140/#comment217970> For consistency, we should capitalize `samza`. s/samza/Samza everywhere. I've seen this being consistently done in the other parts of the open source docs like http://samza.apache.org/learn/documentation/0.10/container/samza-container.html docs/learn/documentation/versioned/operations/split-deployment.md (line 122) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52140/#comment217967> nit: typo here.. s/SMAZA/SAMZA docs/learn/documentation/versioned/operations/split-deployment.md (line 123) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52140/#comment217968> nit: If the setting is empty`,`.. What `setting` are you referring to?(it should be `$VERSION`).. docs/learn/documentation/versioned/operations/split-deployment.md (line 124) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52140/#comment217969> s/lib path / library path - Jagadish Venkatraman On Sept. 22, 2016, 11:43 p.m., Boris Shkolnik wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/52140/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Sept. 22, 2016, 11:43 p.m.) > > > Review request for samza. > > > Bugs: SAMZA-927 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SAMZA-927 > > > Repository: samza > > > Description > ------- > > added docs for split deployment > > > Diffs > ----- > > docs/learn/documentation/versioned/operations/split-deployment.md > PRE-CREATION > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52140/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Boris Shkolnik > >
