curator-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jordan Zimmerman <jor...@jordanzimmerman.com>
Subject Re: CURATOR-3.0 tests
Date Sun, 05 Jun 2016 23:44:47 GMT
Yes, that’s correct. It’s a patch against master. I’ll do the merge if you’re OK with
it.

-Jordan

> On Jun 5, 2016, at 6:42 PM, Cameron McKenzie <mckenzie.cam@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> hey Jordan,
> The fix for CURATOR-335 looks good to me, but I'm wondering if it should
> actually be applied against master and then merged into 3.0?
> 
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <
> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
> 
>> no worries - get well.
>> 
>>> On Jun 2, 2016, at 9:20 PM, Cameron McKenzie <mckenzie.cam@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Thanks for sorting this out Jordan. I'm pretty sick today so won't get
>>> around to looking at it, but I will try over the weekend or really next
>> week
>>> On 3 Jun 2016 7:05 AM, "Jordan Zimmerman" <jordan@jordanzimmerman.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> It sounds like curator is using a different algorithm since it has
>>>>> nodes sorting their position to determine if they have a lease or not.
>>>> 
>>>> No - I just added that as I thought there was a bug. But, now I realize
>>>> I’m wrong. So, it was correct all along. Thanks Ben.
>>>> 
>>>> -Jordan
>> 
>> 


Mime
View raw message