Re: Review Request 59989: Added a test `ProtobufTest.JsonifyMap`.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59989/#review177587 --- Patch looks great! Reviews applied: [59987, 59988, 59989]

Re: Review Request 59987: Added protobuf map support.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59987/#review177586 --- Patch looks great! Reviews applied: [59987] Passed command:

Review Request 59989: Added a test `ProtobufTest.JsonifyMap`.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59989/ --- Review request for mesos, Anand Mazumdar and Zhitao Li. Repository: mesos

Review Request 59988: Added a new protobuf message `MapMessage` for protobuf tests.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59988/ --- Review request for mesos, Anand Mazumdar and Zhitao Li. Repository: mesos

Review Request 59987: Added protobuf map support.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59987/ --- Review request for mesos, Anand Mazumdar and Zhitao Li. Repository: mesos

Re: Review Request 59552: Add support for explicitly setting bounding capabilities.

> On June 11, 2017, 6:11 p.m., Jie Yu wrote: > > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/launch.cpp > > Lines 642-643 (patched) > > > > > > Let's make sure inheritable is always a subset of bounding. This > > prevents a

Re: Review Request 59554: Rename the `--allowed_capabilities` flag to `--effective_capabilities`.

> On June 11, 2017, 6:23 p.m., Jie Yu wrote: > > src/slave/flags.cpp > > Line 608 (original), 603 (patched) > > > > > > Is that still true? I think that depends on if bounding is set or not. I think it is still

Re: Review Request 59185: Add ambient capability support.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59185/ --- (Updated June 11, 2017, 6:34 p.m.) Review request for mesos, Jie Yu and Jiang

Re: Review Request 59185: Add ambient capability support.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59185/#review177579 --- Please fix the review board dependency. Looks like there are

Re: Review Request 59186: Additional linux/capabilities isolator documentation.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59186/#review177578 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Jie Yu On June 5, 2017, 5:29 p.m.,

Re: Review Request 59185: Add ambient capability support.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59185/#review177577 --- Bad patch! Reviews applied: [59185, 59552, 59551, 59550, 59549,

Re: Review Request 59806: Synchronize capabilities flags documentation.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59806/#review177576 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Jie Yu On June 5, 2017, 5:10 p.m.,

Re: Review Request 59554: Rename the `--allowed_capabilities` flag to `--effective_capabilities`.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59554/#review177575 --- Fix it, then Ship it! src/slave/flags.cpp Line 608

Re: Review Request 59185: Add ambient capability support.

> On June 11, 2017, 5:20 p.m., Jie Yu wrote: > > src/linux/capabilities.cpp > > Lines 256-258 (patched) > > > > > > I would move the implementation of `_ambientCapabilitiesSupported` to > > this constructor. > >

Re: Review Request 59185: Add ambient capability support.

> On June 11, 2017, 5:20 p.m., Jie Yu wrote: > > src/linux/capabilities.cpp > > Lines 256-258 (patched) > > > > > > I would move the implementation of `_ambientCapabilitiesSupported` to > > this constructor. > >

Re: Review Request 59185: Add ambient capability support.

> On June 11, 2017, 5:20 p.m., Jie Yu wrote: > > src/linux/capabilities.cpp > > Lines 256-258 (patched) > > > > > > I would move the implementation of `_ambientCapabilitiesSupported` to > > this constructor. It is

Re: Review Request 59552: Add support for explicitly setting bounding capabilities.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59552/#review177551 --- Fix it, then Ship it!

Re: Review Request 59552: Add support for explicitly setting bounding capabilities.

> On June 9, 2017, 9:28 p.m., Jie Yu wrote: > > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/linux/capabilities.cpp > > Lines 99-103 (patched) > > > > > > In fact, i think the semantics should be: > > > > 1)

Re: Review Request 59185: Add ambient capability support.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59185/#review177568 --- Fix it, then Ship it! Nice tests! src/linux/capabilities.cpp

Re: Review Request 59099: Enabled authorization for v1 API call UPDATE_MAINTENANCE_SCHEDULE.

> On June 10, 2017, 7:45 p.m., Greg Mann wrote: > > src/master/http.cpp > > Line 4098 (original), 4139-4141 (patched) > > > > > > You could do without the lambda here, right? > > > > ``` > >