Re: Review Request 46361: deleting --setuid-health-checks and switching to --nosetuid-health-checks flag to to control whether the executor runs health checks as the job role's user.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46361/#review129474 --- Ship it! Master (96d5b64) is green with this patch. ./build-s

Review Request 46361: deleting --setuid-health-checks and switching to --nosetuid-health-checks flag to to control whether the executor runs health checks as the job role's user.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46361/ --- Review request for Aurora, Bill Farner and Zameer Manji. Repository: aurora D

Re: Review Request 46361: deleting --setuid-health-checks and switching to --nosetuid-health-checks flag to to control whether the executor runs health checks as the job role's user.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46361/ --- (Updated April 19, 2016, 2:31 a.m.) Review request for Aurora, Bill Farner and

Re: Review Request 46346: Add @Timed annotations to cron stores.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46346/#review129442 --- Master (a619731) is red with this patch. ./build-support/jenkins

Re: Review Request 46346: Add @Timed annotations to cron stores.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46346/ --- (Updated April 18, 2016, 2:50 p.m.) Review request for Aurora and Maxim Khutorn

Re: Review Request 46346: Add @Timed annotations to cron stores.

> On April 18, 2016, 2:26 p.m., Stephan Erb wrote: > > Wouldn't it make sense to have `cron` in the stats names somehow? Just from > > reading `/vars` it will be difficult for operators to figure out that those > > are covering cron jobs. Good catch, updating the metrics. - Zameer

Re: Review Request 46346: Add @Timed annotations to cron stores.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46346/#review129438 --- Wouldn't it make sense to have `cron` in the stats names somehow?

Re: Review Request 46346: Add @Timed annotations to cron stores.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46346/#review129437 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Maxim Khutornenko On April 18, 2016, 9:0

Review Request 46346: Add @Timed annotations to cron stores.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46346/ --- Review request for Aurora and Maxim Khutornenko. Bugs: AURORA-1665 https://

Re: Review Request 46290: Adding a flag to control whether the executor runs health checks as the job's role's user

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46290/#review129417 --- Ship it! Master (f4a0845) is green with this patch. ./build-s

Re: Review Request 46290: Adding a flag to control whether the executor runs health checks as the job's role's user

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46290/#review129414 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Bill Farner On April 18, 2016, 12:02 p.m

Re: Review Request 46290: Adding a flag to control whether the executor runs health checks as the job's role's user

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46290/ --- (Updated April 18, 2016, 7:02 p.m.) Review request for Aurora, Bill Farner and

Re: Review Request 46290: Adding a flag to control whether the executor runs health checks as the job's role's user

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46290/ --- (Updated April 18, 2016, 7:01 p.m.) Review request for Aurora, Bill Farner and

Re: Review Request 46290: Adding a flag to control whether the executor runs health checks as the job's role's user

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46290/ --- (Updated April 18, 2016, 6:43 p.m.) Review request for Aurora, Bill Farner and

Re: Review Request 46290: Adding a flag to control whether the executor runs health checks as the job's role's user

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46290/ --- (Updated April 18, 2016, 6:42 p.m.) Review request for Aurora, Bill Farner and

Re: Review Request 46290: adding --setuid-health-checks to not demote health check user:group to role

> On April 18, 2016, 11:33 a.m., Joshua Cohen wrote: > > There was a discussion in IRC about just configuring your health check to > > be `sudo ...`. I may have missed the resolution of that discussion, was > > that not a feasible approach? > > Dmitriy Shirchenko wrote: > It is not because

Re: Review Request 46290: adding --setuid-health-checks to not demote health check user:group to role

> On April 18, 2016, 6:33 p.m., Joshua Cohen wrote: > > There was a discussion in IRC about just configuring your health check to > > be `sudo ...`. I may have missed the resolution of that discussion, was > > that not a feasible approach? It is not because the actual shell command (with or wi

Re: Review Request 46290: adding --setuid-health-checks to not demote health check user:group to role

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46290/ --- (Updated April 18, 2016, 6:34 p.m.) Review request for Aurora, Bill Farner and

Re: Review Request 46290: adding --setuid-health-checks to not demote health check user:group to role

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46290/ --- (Updated April 18, 2016, 6:33 p.m.) Review request for Aurora, Bill Farner and

Re: Review Request 46290: adding --setuid-health-checks to not demote health check user:group to role

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46290/#review129401 --- There was a discussion in IRC about just configuring your health c

Re: Review Request 46290: adding do-not-demote-health-check-to-role flag to not demote health check user:group to role

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46290/#review129400 --- This patch does not apply cleanly against master (f4a0845), do you

Re: Review Request 46290: adding do-not-demote-health-check-to-role flag to not demote health check user:group to role

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46290/ --- (Updated April 18, 2016, 6:30 p.m.) Review request for Aurora, Bill Farner and

Re: Review Request 46286: Plumb Curator discovery as an option.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46286/ --- (Updated April 18, 2016, 12:25 p.m.) Review request for Aurora, Bill Farner and

Re: Review Request 46286: Plumb Curator discovery as an option.

> On April 18, 2016, 11:58 a.m., Zameer Manji wrote: > > Can you file a ticket to make this default in 0.15? > > Bill Farner wrote: > Is there a reason to even do a release with both implementations? (i.e. > i propose we kill the commons one in a matter of weeks) Having the ability > to

Re: Review Request 46286: Plumb Curator discovery as an option.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46286/#review129394 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Bill Farner On April 16, 2016, 9:10 a.m.

Re: Review Request 46286: Plumb Curator discovery as an option.

> On April 18, 2016, 10:58 a.m., Zameer Manji wrote: > > Can you file a ticket to make this default in 0.15? > > Bill Farner wrote: > Is there a reason to even do a release with both implementations? (i.e. > i propose we kill the commons one in a matter of weeks) Having the ability > to

Re: Review Request 46291: Moving db migration into LogStorage

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46291/#review129390 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Zameer Manji On April 18, 2016, 10:29 a.

Re: Review Request 46286: Plumb Curator discovery as an option.

> On April 18, 2016, 11:58 a.m., Zameer Manji wrote: > > Can you file a ticket to make this default in 0.15? > > Bill Farner wrote: > Is there a reason to even do a release with both implementations? (i.e. > i propose we kill the commons one in a matter of weeks) Having the ability > to

Re: Review Request 46286: Plumb Curator discovery as an option.

> On April 18, 2016, 10:58 a.m., Zameer Manji wrote: > > Can you file a ticket to make this default in 0.15? Is there a reason to even do a release with both implementations? (i.e. i propose we kill the commons one in a matter of weeks) Having the ability to toggle between implementations is

Re: Review Request 46290: adding do-not-demote-health-check-to-role flag to not demote health check user:group to role

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46290/#review129381 --- RELEASE-NOTES.md (line 6)

Re: Review Request 46286: Plumb Curator discovery as an option.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46286/#review129380 --- Ship it! Can you file a ticket to make this default in 0.15? -

Re: Review Request 46291: Moving db migration into LogStorage

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46291/#review129376 --- I'll sit out of this review if that's okay with you. Zameer and J

Re: Review Request 46290: adding do-not-demote-health-check-to-role flag to not demote health check user:group to role

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46290/#review129375 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Zameer Manji On April 15, 2016, 4:59 p.m

Re: Review Request 46336: Revert "Revert "Upgrade to Mesos 0.27.2""

> On April 18, 2016, 4:26 p.m., John Sirois wrote: > > RELEASE-NOTES.md, line 3 > > > > > > This should be under a '### New/updated:' section per current protocol. Fixed. Also removed "Not yet released" from 0.13.0

Re: Review Request 46336: Revert "Revert "Upgrade to Mesos 0.27.2""

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46336/ --- (Updated April 18, 2016, 4:32 p.m.) Review request for Aurora and John Sirois.

Re: Review Request 46336: Revert "Revert "Upgrade to Mesos 0.27.2""

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46336/#review129360 --- Ship it! Master (e543415) is green with this patch. ./build-s

Re: Review Request 46291: Moving db migration into LogStorage

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46291/#review129359 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Joshua Cohen On April 15, 2016, 11:37 p.

Review Request 46336: Revert "Revert "Upgrade to Mesos 0.27.2""

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46336/ --- Review request for Aurora and John Sirois. Repository: aurora Description ---

Re: Review Request 46336: Revert "Revert "Upgrade to Mesos 0.27.2""

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46336/#review129357 --- Ship it! RELEASE-NOTES.md (line 3)

Re: Review Request 46335: Add an explicit box version to Vagrantfile.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46335/#review129348 --- Ship it! Ship It! - John Sirois On April 18, 2016, 9:06 a.m.

Re: Review Request 46335: Add an explicit box version to Vagrantfile.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46335/#review129347 --- Ship it! Master (81f52e4) is green with this patch. ./build-s

Review Request 46335: Add an explicit box version to Vagrantfile.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46335/ --- Review request for Aurora and John Sirois. Bugs: AURORA-1667 https://issues