DanielLeens commented on PR #10529: URL: https://github.com/apache/seatunnel/pull/10529#issuecomment-4831576166
Thanks for the thoughtful follow-up. I rechecked the current head and my source-level conclusion is unchanged from the earlier Daniel pass: I still do not see a blocker in the socket-reader lifecycle path that this PR changes (`SocketSource.createReader()` -> `SocketSourceReader.open()` -> repeated `pollNext()` -> `close()`). The comments from @DanielCarter-stack are reasonable hardening ideas, especially around cleanup structure and adding a direct regression test, but on this unchanged head the gating item from my side is still the GitHub `Build` check staying at `ACTION_REQUIRED`, not a reopened code-path bug in this diff. So I do not need a fresh full rereview on the current code yet. If you decide to fold in the extra hardening suggestions, happy to look again after a new commit; otherwise the next real gate is getting the full CI run triggered and settled. -- 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]
