Mailing-List: contact dev-help@mesos.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@mesos.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="===============8223199512141299159=="
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Review Request 20141: Added containerizer.proto.
From: "Till Toenshoff" <toenshoff@me.com>
To: "Niklas Nielsen" <nik@qni.dk>, "Benjamin Hindman" <benh@berkeley.edu>
Cc: "Vinod Kone" <vinodkone@gmail.com>, "mesos" <dev@mesos.apache.org>,
 "Till Toenshoff" <toenshoff@me.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 23:56:36 -0000
Message-ID: <20140410235636.22531.86536@reviews.apache.org>
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Sender: "Till Toenshoff" <noreply@reviews.apache.org>
References: <20140409200506.847.22536@reviews.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <20140409200506.847.22536@reviews.apache.org>
Reply-To: "Till Toenshoff" <toenshoff@me.com>

--===============8223199512141299159==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


> On April 9, 2014, 8:05 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> > src/Makefile.am, line 110
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/20141/diff/2/?file=553536#file553536line110>
> >
> >     Do we want the containerizer proto in a separate python module? I don't know what is idiomatic in Python but can we just add containerizer protos to mesos_pb2? Similarly for Java.
> >     
> >

AFAIK .proto-files do only support a single namespace per definition file. I dont see how I could get both requirements satisfied; having a separate namespace (containerizer::) and having a single output file (mesos_pb2.py).


> On April 9, 2014, 8:05 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> > src/Makefile.am, lines 154-157
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/20141/diff/2/?file=553536#file553536line154>
> >
> >     this seems to be the same rule as above?


> On April 9, 2014, 8:05 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> > src/slave/containerizer/containerizer.proto, lines 24-46
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/20141/diff/2/?file=553537#file553537line24>
> >
> >     What about protobufs for Usage, Wait and Destroy?
> >     
> >     Should Termination also be pulled into this namespace?

The parameter definitions for the containerizer API on 'usage', 'wait' and 'destroy' do currently only contain a single parameter; ContainerID (see mesos_containerizer.hpp:68-74), hence I thought that their explicit definitions would not add any value.

For 'Termination', that seems to make sense indeed. Will update accordingly.


- Till


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/20141/#review39926
-----------------------------------------------------------


On April 9, 2014, 12:25 a.m., Till Toenshoff wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/20141/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated April 9, 2014, 12:25 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Niklas Nielsen.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Adds containerizer.proto containing protobuf message definitions for "launch" and "update". Both are used in the upcoming External Containerizer.
> 
> These protos are defined within their own namespace: containerizer.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/Makefile.am 95f133d 
>   src/slave/containerizer/containerizer.proto PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/20141/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Till Toenshoff
> 
>


--===============8223199512141299159==--