[GitHub] bookkeeper issue #127: BOOKKEEPER-1028 and BOOKKEEPER-1029

Github user reddycharan commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/127 @sijie my bad, missed checking findbugs error after previous push. Fixed them now and it passed. Thanks. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have

[GitHub] bookkeeper issue #127: BOOKKEEPER-1028 and BOOKKEEPER-1029

Github user sijie commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/127 @reddycharan there is a findbugs error introduced in this pull request. Can you fix that? --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as

[GitHub] bookkeeper issue #127: BOOKKEEPER-1028 and BOOKKEEPER-1029

Github user reddycharan commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/127 @sijie addressed your comments - - move logic from BKShell to BookkeeperAdmin - added functional testcases - make DistributionSchedule and RoundRobinDistributionSchedule non-public

[GitHub] bookkeeper issue #127: BOOKKEEPER-1028 and BOOKKEEPER-1029

Github user reddycharan commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/127 @sijie if you dont have anymore comments, this commit also should be good to go. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as wel

[GitHub] bookkeeper issue #127: BOOKKEEPER-1028 and BOOKKEEPER-1029

Github user eolivelli commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/127 jenkins job crashed, I restarted it https://builds.apache.org/job/bookkeeper-precommit-pullrequest/54/console CI completed with 2 tests failures, I think they are not releated to the

[GitHub] bookkeeper issue #127: BOOKKEEPER-1028 and BOOKKEEPER-1029

Github user reddycharan commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/127 @eolivelli I fixed it. It seems this time it has passed. Boxing/unboxing checks is new thing to me. Thanks for the follow up. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this emai

[GitHub] bookkeeper issue #127: BOOKKEEPER-1028 and BOOKKEEPER-1029

Github user eolivelli commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/127 I am sorry @reddycharan but findbugs is still failing [INFO] Boxing/unboxing to parse a primitive org.apache.bookkeeper.bookie.BookieShell$LostBookieRecoveryDelayCmd.runCmd(CommandLine)

[GitHub] bookkeeper issue #127: BOOKKEEPER-1028 and BOOKKEEPER-1029

Github user reddycharan commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/127 @eolivelli @sijie fixed rat check warnings you mentioned. Yes 'decommissionbookie' bkshell command has to be executed in the node, which is being decommissioned. added consi

[GitHub] bookkeeper issue #127: BOOKKEEPER-1028 and BOOKKEEPER-1029

Github user reddycharan commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/127 sure, will do. I was just waiting for full code review and comments, so that I can address all of them at once. Thanks, Charan --- If your project is set up for it, you can rep

[GitHub] bookkeeper issue #127: BOOKKEEPER-1028 and BOOKKEEPER-1029

Github user sijie commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/127 @reddycharan do you mind addressing the findbugs error? --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have

[GitHub] bookkeeper issue #127: BOOKKEEPER-1028 and BOOKKEEPER-1029

Github user eolivelli commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/127 @reddycharan I have started a review. All tests run without failures on my laptop (after rebasing to current master) Apache Rat check is OK But I see the findbugs errors b