Re: Review Request 43938: Required jsonifying of generic protobuf to be explicit opt-in [stout].

> On Feb. 26, 2016, 9:38 p.m., Neil Conway wrote: > > 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/protobuf.hpp, line 625 > > > > > > Is this the best name for this type? Not sure there's a better name, > > but

Re: Review Request 43938: Required jsonifying of generic protobuf to be explicit opt-in [stout].

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/43938/ --- (Updated Feb. 28, 2016, 2:17 a.m.) Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman,

Re: Review Request 43938: Required jsonifying of generic protobuf to be explicit opt-in [stout].

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/43938/#review120963 --- Fix it, then Ship it! 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/inclu

Re: Review Request 43938: Required jsonifying of generic protobuf to be explicit opt-in [stout].

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/43938/#review120476 --- 3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/protobuf_tests.cpp (line

Review Request 43938: Required jsonifying of generic protobuf to be explicit opt-in [stout].

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/43938/ --- Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Joris Van Remoortere. Bugs: MESO