---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Oct. 8, 2014, 2:31 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman,
On Oct. 8, 2014, 1:17 a.m., Michael Park wrote:
src/module/manager.hpp, lines 95-105
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/17/?file=714903#file714903line95
I would suggest changing these to be static functions that return
static singletons as per
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Oct. 8, 2014, 12:22 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review55823
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Niklas Nielsen
On Oct. 8, 2014, 9:22 a.m.,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review55874
---
src/module/manager.cpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Oct. 8, 2014, 4:52 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review55886
---
Ship it!
Alright! Kapil and I have made a few minor style/syntax
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Oct. 7, 2014, 6:43 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman,
On Oct. 6, 2014, 11:56 p.m., Benjamin Hindman wrote:
src/examples/example_module_impl.cpp, line 32
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/14/?file=713786#file713786line32
To Bernd's point above, if you declare/define this at the bottom then
you won't need the forward
On Oct. 6, 2014, 7:25 a.m., Bernd Mathiske wrote:
src/examples/test_module.hpp, line 26
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/14/?file=713787#file713787line26
Now there is a confusion whether TestModule is the module or
exampleModule is the module. I suggest we only call one of
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Oct. 7, 2014, 6:59 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Oct. 7, 2014, 7:07 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review55735
---
src/module/manager.hpp
On Oct. 8, 2014, 1:17 a.m., Michael Park wrote:
src/module/manager.hpp, lines 95-105
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/17/?file=714903#file714903line95
I would suggest changing these to be static functions that return
static singletons as per
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review55487
---
include/mesos/module.hpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review55568
---
Great iteration Kapil! This is your first major contribution to the
On Sept. 29, 2014, 2:57 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
include/mesos/module.hpp.in, lines 46-47
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/11/?file=708522#file708522line46
Can we use existing boost helpers for this? Something like
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Oct. 3, 2014, 7:46 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman,
On Oct. 1, 2014, 1:35 p.m., Benjamin Hindman wrote:
include/mesos/module.hpp.in, line 78
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/12/?file=709880#file709880line78
I still am not understanding why we have to introduce more complexity
with macros. It seems like we could get away
On Sept. 29, 2014, 9:57 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
include/mesos/module.hpp.in, lines 46-47
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/11/?file=708522#file708522line46
Can we use existing boost helpers for this? Something like
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review55065
---
include/mesos/module.hpp.in
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Oct. 1, 2014, 7:18 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman,
On Oct. 1, 2014, 4:35 p.m., Benjamin Hindman wrote:
include/mesos/module.hpp.in, line 42
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/12/?file=709880#file709880line42
Why aren't we just using MESOS_VERSION from mesos/mesos.hpp(.in)? I
don't like the idea of introducing another macro
On Oct. 1, 2014, 1:35 p.m., Benjamin Hindman wrote:
src/module/manager.cpp, line 59
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/12/?file=709886#file709886line59
Maybe I'm just getting a big grumpy, but I'm really not in favor of
overloading the term 'role' here. We've overloaded
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review54955
---
include/mesos/module.hpp.in
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Sept. 30, 2014, 7:01 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin
On Sept. 29, 2014, 5:57 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
include/mesos/module.hpp.in, lines 46-47
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/11/?file=708522#file708522line46
Can we use existing boost helpers for this? Something like
On Sept. 24, 2014, 8:05 p.m., Timothy St. Clair wrote:
src/module/manager.cpp, line 173
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/5/?file=701887#file701887line173
You could probably stick the json parsing into a separate sub-class.
I'm all for breaking out a small JIRA tree from
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review54811
---
Ship it!
I still think there will be revisions, but I'm good for
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Sept. 29, 2014, 5:16 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review54879
---
Style review.
One high-level comment: the additional fields for
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Sept. 26, 2014, 7:26 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin
On Sept. 24, 2014, 4:05 p.m., Timothy St. Clair wrote:
include/mesos/module.hpp, line 73
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/5/?file=701882#file701882line73
Perhaps we can breakout in another JIRA, but I would to denote both
some form of AUTHORING as well as define api's as
On Sept. 24, 2014, 4:05 p.m., Timothy St. Clair wrote:
src/module/manager.hpp, line 141
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/5/?file=701886#file701886line141
can't we use std::mutex now?
Kapil Arya wrote:
The current code relies on common/lock.hpp, that uses pthread
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Sept. 25, 2014, 8:45 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Sept. 25, 2014, 9:27 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review54646
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [25848]
All tests passed.
-
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review54425
---
I still debate whether we should name it plugin vs. module.
On Sept. 24, 2014, 1:05 p.m., Timothy St. Clair wrote:
I still debate whether we should name it plugin vs. module. Thoughts?
Could be called either or, but think the term 'module' is pretty clear and is
what we have gone with so far. I don't see any good reason to change it now
unless
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Sept. 24, 2014, 7:54 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin
On Sept. 24, 2014, 4:05 p.m., Timothy St. Clair wrote:
src/module/manager.hpp, line 141
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/5/?file=701886#file701886line141
can't we use std::mutex now?
The current code relies on common/lock.hpp, that uses pthread mutexes.
On Sept. 24, 2014,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Sept. 24, 2014, 8:11 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin
On Sept. 24, 2014, 8:05 p.m., Timothy St. Clair wrote:
include/mesos/module.hpp, line 73
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/5/?file=701882#file701882line73
Perhaps we can breakout in another JIRA, but I would to denote both
some form of AUTHORING as well as define api's as
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review54391
---
Minor comments in passing.
src/examples/test_module.hpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Sept. 22, 2014, 5:25 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Sept. 22, 2014, 5:30 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin
On Sept. 19, 2014, 7:39 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
src/module/manager.hpp, line 88
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/1/?file=697028#file697028line88
Can we find some ABI documentation that supports this claim and maybe
throw in a reference?
Added a TODO for now.
On
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review54118
---
Bad patch!
Reviews applied: [25848]
Failed command:
On Sept. 19, 2014, 7:39 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
src/module/manager.cpp, lines 43-44
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/1/?file=697029#file697029line43
Ben, we did the module manager as a singleton. I know it is a uncommon
pattern in Mesos in general. Do you have any
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Sept. 22, 2014, 8:22 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin
On Sept. 19, 2014, 7:39 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
src/examples/test_module.cpp, line 38
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/1/?file=697027#file697027line38
You could also throw in a comment here on what function declaration
that gets generated i.e. exported symbol name and
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Sept. 23, 2014, 12:05 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman, Bernd Mathiske, Niklas Nielsen, and
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Sept. 19, 2014, 4:40 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review54043
---
First pass
src/examples/test_module.cpp
55 matches
Mail list logo
