lizhimins commented on PR #5610:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/rocketmq-dashboard/pull/5610#issuecomment-6076052125
Thanks - the diagnosis is exactly right, but it has already been fixed on
the integration branch.
This PR targets master, which is stuck at 0228dad5b (Sep 23);
rocketmq-studio is 60 commits
ahead and #4839 (75cba9cf8, Sep 26) already rewrote
normalizeDeliveryOrderType to
String value = raw.trim().toUpperCase(Locale.ROOT);
if (value.contains("FIFO") || value.contains("ORDER")) { ... }
with a javadoc that names PARTITON_ORDER / MESSAGES_ORDER / PARTITION_ORDER
and the deliberate
alignment with TencentInstanceProvider#isOrderly. AliyunInstanceProviderTest
also gained
normalizeDeliveryOrderTypeShouldMapConsoleOrderTypesToOrderlyTest (five
spellings including
"partiton_order" and " PARTITON_ORDER ", plus a Concurrently
counter-example) and
createConsumerGroupShouldKeepPartitionOrderedGroupsOrderlyTest, which pins
the end-to-end
request.setDeliveryOrderType("Orderly").
Your variant is also narrower than what is on the branch:
"FIFO".equals(upper) would send
FIFO_ORDERED / MY_FIFO back to Concurrently, where trunk maps them to
Orderly. And the branch
genuinely conflicts with this change (merge-tree reports a content conflict
in
AliyunInstanceProvider.java), so it cannot be merged as is.
Closing as already covered - no action needed. For future PRs please base on
rocketmq-studio
rather than master; that is the branch studio work is integrated on, and
basing on master is
what made this look unfixed.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
