DanielLeens commented on PR #11271: URL: https://github.com/apache/seatunnel/pull/11271#issuecomment-5350295450
One more note tying this together for anyone landing on this PR: @davidzollo's `CHANGES_REQUESTED` review from 2026-08-11 flagged missing regression coverage for the reader-side restore control flow (`IncrementalSourceReader.java:149-173` — the "prune, then skip-queue-and-request-a-new-split-if-empty" branch), since the tests at that point only covered `IncrementalSplit.pruneTables()` as a pure data helper. That gap has since been closed by `IncrementalSourceReaderTest.java` (added in a later commit) and, in this latest `31c3bf8374` commit, by the new `IncrementalSplitAssignerTest` cases that exercise the enumerator-side split-recreation this reader branch hands off to. From my side, after today's full re-review I don't see any remaining source-level blocker, and I've submitted an `APPROVED` review reflecting that. Since I don't have write-level review controls on this repository, my approval doesn't automatically clear the historical `CHANGES_REQUESTED` entry from GitHub's review-decision summary — a maintainer with write access (or @davidzollo himself, since the underlying concern is now addressed) would need to dismiss or update that review for the merge gate to reflect the current state. The only other thing standing between this PR and a green `Build` is a one-off Windows Hazelcast startup flake in an unrelated engine-server test (details in my review above) — rerunning that single job should clear it. -- 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]
