Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-accumulo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-accumulo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E7E32D6C0 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 13:28:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 71430 invoked by uid 500); 23 Aug 2012 13:28:01 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-accumulo-dev-archive@accumulo.apache.org Received: (qmail 71301 invoked by uid 500); 23 Aug 2012 13:28:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@accumulo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@accumulo.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@accumulo.apache.org Received: (qmail 71293 invoked by uid 99); 23 Aug 2012 13:28:01 -0000 Received: from minotaur.apache.org (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 13:28:01 +0000 Received: from localhost (HELO mail-vc0-f169.google.com) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username vines, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 13:28:01 +0000 Received: by vcbfl10 with SMTP id fl10so903405vcb.0 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 06:28:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.58.85.2 with SMTP id d2mr1330145vez.33.1345728480220; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 06:28:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: vines@apache.org Received: by 10.220.106.72 with HTTP; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 06:27:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: John Vines Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 09:27:39 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Please review check-ins To: dev@accumulo.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b6dbfd40716c304c7eed4bc --047d7b6dbfd40716c304c7eed4bc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 They look kosher to me On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Keith Turner wrote: > I will take a look at them. If they did not have test, then you > probably do not need to add test when making improvements like this. > I would recommend at least executing the code though. Many times I > have made what I thought were simple changes and it blew up for some > reason. > > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 12:01 AM, David Medinets > wrote: > > Both of the following jira tickets are related to unclosed objects. > > The changes were fairly simply and the code compiled after my change. > > I did not create any tests or execute the code. If someone can do a > > review after a 'svn update', I'd appreciate it. > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-737 > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-738 > > > > Thanks > --047d7b6dbfd40716c304c7eed4bc--