Re: Review Request 23348: Upgrading Mesos version from 0.18.0 to 0.19.0

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23348/#review47477 --- Bad patch! Reviews applied: [23348] Failed command: git apply --in

Re: Review Request 23348: Upgrading Mesos version from 0.18.0 to 0.19.0

> On July 8, 2014, 11:15 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote: > > 3rdparty/python/BUILD, line 30 > > > > > > we need to promote this egg internally first. > > > > i will promote it: > > http://jvm-ci.twitter.biz/job/mesos-

Re: Review Request 23348: Upgrading Mesos version from 0.18.0 to 0.19.0

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23348/#review47473 --- 3rdparty/python/BUILD

Review Request 23348: Upgrading Mesos version from 0.18.0 to 0.19.0

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23348/ --- Review request for mesos, Joe Smith, Kevin Sweeney, and Bill Farner. Repository

Re: Review Request 23224: Refactored the python bindings into multiple modules.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23224/#review47461 --- Patch looks great! Reviews applied: [23224] All tests passed. - M

Re: Review Request 23224: Refactored the python bindings into multiple modules.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23224/ --- (Updated July 8, 2014, 5:58 p.m.) Review request for mesos. Bugs: MESOS-857

Re: Review Request 23224: Refactored the python bindings into multiple modules.

> On July 8, 2014, 5:20 p.m., Mesos ReviewBot wrote: > > Bad patch! > > > > Reviews applied: [23224] > > > > Failed command: make -j3 distcheck > > > > Error: > > if test -d "mesos-0.20.0"; then find "mesos-0.20.0" -type d ! -perm -200 > > -exec chmod u+w {} ';' && rm -rf "mesos-0.20.0" || {

Jenkins build is back to normal : mesos-reviewbot #1089

See

Re: Review Request 23224: Refactored the python bindings into multiple modules.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23224/#review47454 --- Bad patch! Reviews applied: [23224] Failed command: make -j3 distc

Re: Review Request 22981: enable co-mounting of cpu & cpuacct for systemd

> On June 27, 2014, 9:21 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote: > > src/linux/cgroups.cpp, lines 453-463 > > > > > > I don't think this is going to work. > > > > First off, the cpushare isolator needs to be made aware of the

Re: Review Request 23224: Refactored the python bindings into multiple modules.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23224/ --- (Updated July 8, 2014, 5:05 p.m.) Review request for mesos. Changes ---

Re: Review Request 22980: Enable support for existing cgroups, don't always try to create.

> On June 25, 2014, 10:09 p.m., Ian Downes wrote: > > src/slave/containerizer/isolators/cgroups/cpushare.cpp, line 236 > > > > > > Why would the cgroup already exist? The cgroup is based on the > > containerId which s

Re: Review Request 23147: Rename slaves/frameworks activated/deactivated

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23147/#review47434 --- src/master/allocator.hpp

Re: Review Request 23147: Rename slaves/frameworks activated/deactivated

> On June 29, 2014, 11:44 p.m., Adam B wrote: > > src/master/master.hpp, lines 852-854 > > > > > > // We mark a slave 'inactive' ... > > bool active; > > Alexandra Sava wrote: > I have some concerns in changin