mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexander Rukletsov <ruklet...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Review Request 47876: Updated comments for authorization::Object.
Date Mon, 30 May 2016 21:04:14 GMT

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/47876/#review135543
-----------------------------------------------------------




include/mesos/authorizer/authorizer.proto (lines 38 - 40)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/47876/#comment200569>

    I think we should aim for a more general comment here. Since we are not employing the
enum trick, it is possible to set multiple fields in this proto. I would like this comment
to steer away from highliting one particular field (`value`).


- Alexander Rukletsov


On May 26, 2016, 8:25 a.m., Adam B wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/47876/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated May 26, 2016, 8:25 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Joerg Schad and Michael Park.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Updated comments for authorization::Object.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   include/mesos/authorizer/authorizer.proto 02d1a01d57cf34b38524f4368187878b03343537

> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/47876/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Adam B
> 
>


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message