You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@falcon.apache.org by Ajay Yadava <aj...@gmail.com> on 2016/01/18 08:24:17 UTC
Review Request 42449: Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/
-----------------------------------------------------------
Review request for Falcon.
Bugs: FALCON-1707
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-1707
Repository: falcon-git
Description
-------
Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
Diffs
-----
client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java 3f3a871
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/
Testing
-------
Thanks,
Ajay Yadava
Re: Review Request 42449: Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
Posted by Ajay Yadava <aj...@gmail.com>.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/
-----------------------------------------------------------
(Updated Jan. 19, 2016, 7:38 a.m.)
Review request for Falcon.
Changes
-------
Addressed the review comments.
Bugs: FALCON-1707
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-1707
Repository: falcon-git
Description
-------
Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
Diffs (updated)
-----
client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconCLIException.java 831f7ac
client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java 3f3a871
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/
Testing
-------
Thanks,
Ajay Yadava
Re: Review Request 42449: Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
Posted by Ajay Yadava <aj...@gmail.com>.
> On Jan. 18, 2016, 11:05 a.m., Peeyush Bishnoi wrote:
> > client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java, line 118
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/1/?file=1199867#file1199867line118>
> >
> > Many of these parameters has already already defined in FalconCLI class. Instead of defining these parameters again in FalconClient, should not we put all the common parameters in one class and get used by both the classes.
Yes, I also thought about that, there are several such refactoring which need to be done. I believe they should be in client module and cli should depend on it, will handle it with next refactoring of falcon client.
> On Jan. 18, 2016, 11:05 a.m., Peeyush Bishnoi wrote:
> > client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java, line 845
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/1/?file=1199867#file1199867line845>
> >
> > In the given function you don't have a check , if any passed params is null or not.
I haven't added the check because it was not earlier also. It still worked because path params are mandatory while query parameters are not.
> On Jan. 18, 2016, 11:05 a.m., Peeyush Bishnoi wrote:
> > client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java, line 900
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/1/?file=1199867#file1199867line900>
> >
> > Shall we use StringUtils.isNotBlank().
Will change, thanks for catching it.
> On Jan. 18, 2016, 11:05 a.m., Peeyush Bishnoi wrote:
> > client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java, line 847
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/1/?file=1199867#file1199867line847>
> >
> > Should not be the WebResource resource initialized before for() {} loop and then the parameters should be assigned to resource to perform ResourceBuilder.
I will have to extract the first parameter out and then iterate on second parameter onward, worst case it will result in 2 extra if checks on the client side, so I preferred to keep it like this for brevity.
- Ajay
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#review114981
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Jan. 18, 2016, 7:24 a.m., Ajay Yadava wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 18, 2016, 7:24 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for Falcon.
>
>
> Bugs: FALCON-1707
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-1707
>
>
> Repository: falcon-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java 3f3a871
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ajay Yadava
>
>
Re: Review Request 42449: Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
Posted by Ajay Yadava <aj...@gmail.com>.
> On Jan. 18, 2016, 11:05 a.m., Peeyush Bishnoi wrote:
> > client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java, line 900
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/1/?file=1199867#file1199867line900>
> >
> > Shall we use StringUtils.isNotBlank().
>
> Ajay Yadava wrote:
> Will change, thanks for catching it.
Sorry it is a Boolean, hence did it like this.
- Ajay
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#review114981
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Jan. 18, 2016, 7:24 a.m., Ajay Yadava wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 18, 2016, 7:24 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for Falcon.
>
>
> Bugs: FALCON-1707
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-1707
>
>
> Repository: falcon-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java 3f3a871
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ajay Yadava
>
>
Re: Review Request 42449: Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
Posted by Peeyush Bishnoi <bp...@yahoo.co.in>.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#review114981
-----------------------------------------------------------
client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java (line 93)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#comment175825>
Many of these parameters has already already defined in FalconCLI class. Instead of defining these parameters again in FalconClient, should not we put all the common parameters in one class and get used by both the classes.
client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java (line 728)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#comment175828>
In the given function you don't have a check , if any passed params is null or not.
client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java (line 730)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#comment175829>
Should not be the WebResource resource initialized before for() {} loop and then the parameters should be assigned to resource to perform ResourceBuilder.
client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java (line 747)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#comment175830>
Shall we use StringUtils.isNotBlank().
- Peeyush Bishnoi
On Jan. 18, 2016, 7:24 a.m., Ajay Yadava wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 18, 2016, 7:24 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for Falcon.
>
>
> Bugs: FALCON-1707
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-1707
>
>
> Repository: falcon-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java 3f3a871
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ajay Yadava
>
>
Re: Review Request 42449: Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
Posted by Ajay Yadava <aj...@gmail.com>.
> On Jan. 18, 2016, 7:55 a.m., Deepak Barr wrote:
> > client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java, line 832
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/1/?file=1199867#file1199867line832>
> >
> > checkIfSuccessful(clientResponse, String.class)
> >
> > This will probably throw a RuntimeException. The second argument must be an instance of APIResult or a subclass of APIResult.
> >
> > I think we should put an upper bound in checkIfSuccessful() declaration and FalconCLIException.fromReponse() declaration as well to capture such things in compile time.
Ackd. Will fix.
- Ajay
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#review114963
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Jan. 18, 2016, 7:24 a.m., Ajay Yadava wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 18, 2016, 7:24 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for Falcon.
>
>
> Bugs: FALCON-1707
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-1707
>
>
> Repository: falcon-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java 3f3a871
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ajay Yadava
>
>
Re: Review Request 42449: Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
Posted by Deepak Barr <de...@gmail.com>.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#review114963
-----------------------------------------------------------
client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java (line 721)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#comment175800>
checkIfSuccessful(clientResponse, String.class)
This will probably throw a RuntimeException. The second argument must be an instance of APIResult or a subclass of APIResult.
I think we should put an upper bound in checkIfSuccessful() declaration and FalconCLIException.fromReponse() declaration as well to capture such things in compile time.
- Deepak Barr
On Jan. 18, 2016, 7:24 a.m., Ajay Yadava wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 18, 2016, 7:24 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for Falcon.
>
>
> Bugs: FALCON-1707
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-1707
>
>
> Repository: falcon-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java 3f3a871
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ajay Yadava
>
>
Re: Review Request 42449: Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
Posted by Ajay Yadava <aj...@gmail.com>.
> On Jan. 18, 2016, 8:40 a.m., Pallavi Rao wrote:
> > client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java, line 538
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/1/?file=1199867#file1199867line538>
> >
> > Can't use getResponse() method?
>
> Ajay Yadava wrote:
> Yes, we should. This is an oversight(it was a tedious JIRA), will fix it.
Turns out it was not an oversight, EntityList.class doesn't extend from APIResult so left it as it is.
> On Jan. 18, 2016, 8:40 a.m., Pallavi Rao wrote:
> > client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java, line 770
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/1/?file=1199867#file1199867line770>
> >
> > Can't use getResponse() method?
>
> Ajay Yadava wrote:
> Yes we can and we should, thanks for catching it.
Here also we can't use getResponse() as LineageGraphResult also doesn't extend APIResult.
- Ajay
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#review114967
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Jan. 18, 2016, 7:24 a.m., Ajay Yadava wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 18, 2016, 7:24 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for Falcon.
>
>
> Bugs: FALCON-1707
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-1707
>
>
> Repository: falcon-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java 3f3a871
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ajay Yadava
>
>
Re: Review Request 42449: Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
Posted by Pallavi Rao <pa...@inmobi.com>.
> On Jan. 18, 2016, 8:40 a.m., Pallavi Rao wrote:
> > client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java, line 538
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/1/?file=1199867#file1199867line538>
> >
> > Can't use getResponse() method?
>
> Ajay Yadava wrote:
> Yes, we should. This is an oversight(it was a tedious JIRA), will fix it.
>
> Ajay Yadava wrote:
> Turns out it was not an oversight, EntityList.class doesn't extend from APIResult so left it as it is.
Ok. Since we refactored Server side code to just handle instances of APIResult, should we file a JIRA to fix this on server-side to extend APIResult? I think we should be consistent in that all result objects should extend APIResult.
> On Jan. 18, 2016, 8:40 a.m., Pallavi Rao wrote:
> > client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java, line 770
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/1/?file=1199867#file1199867line770>
> >
> > Can't use getResponse() method?
>
> Ajay Yadava wrote:
> Yes we can and we should, thanks for catching it.
>
> Ajay Yadava wrote:
> Here also we can't use getResponse() as LineageGraphResult also doesn't extend APIResult.
As before should we file a JIRA to fix this on server-side to extend APIResult? I think we should be consistent in that all result objects should extend APIResult.
- Pallavi
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#review114967
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Jan. 19, 2016, 7:38 a.m., Ajay Yadava wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 19, 2016, 7:38 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for Falcon.
>
>
> Bugs: FALCON-1707
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-1707
>
>
> Repository: falcon-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconCLIException.java 831f7ac
> client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java 3f3a871
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ajay Yadava
>
>
Re: Review Request 42449: Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
Posted by Ajay Yadava <aj...@gmail.com>.
> On Jan. 18, 2016, 8:40 a.m., Pallavi Rao wrote:
> > client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java, line 770
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/1/?file=1199867#file1199867line770>
> >
> > Can't use getResponse() method?
>
> Ajay Yadava wrote:
> Yes we can and we should, thanks for catching it.
>
> Ajay Yadava wrote:
> Here also we can't use getResponse() as LineageGraphResult also doesn't extend APIResult.
>
> Pallavi Rao wrote:
> As before should we file a JIRA to fix this on server-side to extend APIResult? I think we should be consistent in that all result objects should extend APIResult.
Created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-1759
- Ajay
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#review114967
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Jan. 19, 2016, 7:38 a.m., Ajay Yadava wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 19, 2016, 7:38 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for Falcon.
>
>
> Bugs: FALCON-1707
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-1707
>
>
> Repository: falcon-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconCLIException.java 831f7ac
> client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java 3f3a871
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ajay Yadava
>
>
Re: Review Request 42449: Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
Posted by Ajay Yadava <aj...@gmail.com>.
> On Jan. 18, 2016, 8:40 a.m., Pallavi Rao wrote:
> > client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java, line 381
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/1/?file=1199867#file1199867line381>
> >
> > May be we can have a common method to add all common params (doAsUser), so common changes can be made in single place.
> >
> > Since there is only such param, it might be ok now. But, it sets a good precedence for further changes.
I thought about that but DO_AS is also not there for all apis.
> On Jan. 18, 2016, 8:40 a.m., Pallavi Rao wrote:
> > client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java, line 538
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/1/?file=1199867#file1199867line538>
> >
> > Can't use getResponse() method?
Yes, we should. This is an oversight(it was a tedious JIRA), will fix it.
> On Jan. 18, 2016, 8:40 a.m., Pallavi Rao wrote:
> > client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java, line 412
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/1/?file=1199867#file1199867line412>
> >
> > validate does not use sendEntityRequestWithObject method, whereas submit and submitAndSchedule use it. Why the difference?
Will refactor it and ensure it is consistent.
> On Jan. 18, 2016, 8:40 a.m., Pallavi Rao wrote:
> > client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java, line 431
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/1/?file=1199867#file1199867line431>
> >
> > Can't use sendEntityRequestWithObject method?
Will make it consistent everywhere.
> On Jan. 18, 2016, 8:40 a.m., Pallavi Rao wrote:
> > client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java, line 770
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/1/?file=1199867#file1199867line770>
> >
> > Can't use getResponse() method?
Yes we can and we should, thanks for catching it.
- Ajay
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#review114967
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Jan. 18, 2016, 7:24 a.m., Ajay Yadava wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 18, 2016, 7:24 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for Falcon.
>
>
> Bugs: FALCON-1707
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-1707
>
>
> Repository: falcon-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java 3f3a871
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ajay Yadava
>
>
Re: Review Request 42449: Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
Posted by Ajay Yadava <aj...@gmail.com>.
> On Jan. 18, 2016, 8:40 a.m., Pallavi Rao wrote:
> > client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java, line 538
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/1/?file=1199867#file1199867line538>
> >
> > Can't use getResponse() method?
>
> Ajay Yadava wrote:
> Yes, we should. This is an oversight(it was a tedious JIRA), will fix it.
>
> Ajay Yadava wrote:
> Turns out it was not an oversight, EntityList.class doesn't extend from APIResult so left it as it is.
>
> Pallavi Rao wrote:
> Ok. Since we refactored Server side code to just handle instances of APIResult, should we file a JIRA to fix this on server-side to extend APIResult? I think we should be consistent in that all result objects should extend APIResult.
Created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-1759
- Ajay
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#review114967
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Jan. 19, 2016, 7:38 a.m., Ajay Yadava wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 19, 2016, 7:38 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for Falcon.
>
>
> Bugs: FALCON-1707
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-1707
>
>
> Repository: falcon-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconCLIException.java 831f7ac
> client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java 3f3a871
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ajay Yadava
>
>
Re: Review Request 42449: Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
Posted by Pallavi Rao <pa...@inmobi.com>.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#review114967
-----------------------------------------------------------
client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java (line 349)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#comment175805>
May be we can have a common method to add all common params (doAsUser), so common changes can be made in single place.
Since there is only such param, it might be ok now. But, it sets a good precedence for further changes.
client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java (line 379)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#comment175810>
validate does not use sendEntityRequestWithObject method, whereas submit and submitAndSchedule use it. Why the difference?
client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java (line 396)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#comment175811>
Can't use sendEntityRequestWithObject method?
client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java (line 473)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#comment175813>
Can't use getResponse() method?
client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java (line 671)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/#comment175814>
Can't use getResponse() method?
- Pallavi Rao
On Jan. 18, 2016, 7:24 a.m., Ajay Yadava wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 18, 2016, 7:24 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for Falcon.
>
>
> Bugs: FALCON-1707
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-1707
>
>
> Repository: falcon-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Code Refactoring for Falcon Client
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> client/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/client/FalconClient.java 3f3a871
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42449/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ajay Yadava
>
>