mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joerg Schad <jo...@mesosphere.io>
Subject Re: Review Request 49319: Fixed incorrect comment on ACCESS_SANDBOX in authorizer.proto.
Date Wed, 29 Jun 2016 14:29:53 GMT


> On June 28, 2016, 2:50 p.m., Alexander Rojas wrote:
> > include/mesos/authorizer/authorizer.proto, lines 90-91
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/49319/diff/1/?file=1431917#file1431917line90>
> >
> >     This comment is rather incomplete:
> >     
> >     1. Either they are both set or none.
> >     2. When none are set it is because the task has not yet created the directory
(because is scheduled) or it is finished and there was a lag between access and destruction
of the enpoint.
> >     
> >     All in all, we should mention that having none set is an exceptional case, and
could be treated by returning an error.
> 
> Joerg Schad wrote:
>     1. Are you sure from the setting code that 1. is true?
>     2. I am not sure this needs to mentioned here as this is just describes the semantic,
and a module writer has to deal with that no matter how frequent it is.
>     
>     We can surely mention this is an exceptional case, but I would answer similarly as
for 2.
> 
> Alexander Rojas wrote:
>     1. Yes, It is true!
>     2. if there is no object to authorize too, how do a module writer has to react to
it? This is an exceptional case and needs to be mention that it does occur

How about:
// This action will have an object which might either have both a `FrameworkInfo`,
// and `ExecutorInfo`, or in exceptional cases nothing set.


- Joerg


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/49319/#review139796
-----------------------------------------------------------


On June 28, 2016, 2:35 p.m., Joerg Schad wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/49319/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated June 28, 2016, 2:35 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Adam B and Alexander Rojas.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-5730
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-5730
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> The current semantic is that these fields might not be set.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   include/mesos/authorizer/authorizer.proto fc76796022a6fa3d36a1447c476980868d42c2d0

> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/49319/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Joerg Schad
> 
>


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