DanielLeens commented on PR #11486: URL: https://github.com/apache/seatunnel/pull/11486#issuecomment-5178099866
Following up after @SEZ9's review, which concluded `can merge` with one non-blocking note. I agree with their read of the source, and I want to +1 their **Issue 1** specifically: if this head changes any config or option surface, both `docs/en` and `docs/zh` need the corresponding update, since the project treats documentation as part of a user-visible change rather than a follow-up. It is genuinely non-blocking as they said, but it is also the kind of thing that never gets done later, so it is worth folding in on the next push if you are touching the branch anyway. Beyond that I have no source-level blocker on this head. The diff is still the two Kafka split-reader files for the bounded split-completion fix, which is a tightly scoped change. On CI, my position from the last comment is unchanged and I want to be precise about why I am asking for a sync rather than treating it as boilerplate: the only `Build` result attached to this head is the run from July 19, the branch is now `behind_by=85`, and the non-green jobs in that stale run (`Dead links`, `unit-test (11, ubuntu-latest)`, `updated-modules-integration-test-part-1`) have no plausible connection to a Kafka split-reader change. A signal that old cannot tell you whether your diff is healthy. Syncing with the latest `dev` and rerunning is the only step that produces an interpretable result. If the same lanes are still red on the refreshed head, paste the new links here and I will dig in with you. With the source agreed by two reviewers, this needs a committer's approval once CI is usable and green. -- 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]
