DanielLeens commented on PR #11903: URL: https://github.com/apache/seatunnel/pull/11903#issuecomment-5363695891
Thanks @davidzollo. I double-checked the current `Build` failure (fork run: https://github.com/goutamadwant/seatunnel/actions/runs/32339926601) and it's unrelated to this PR's diff, so I don't want that to hold this up. This PR only adds Javadoc to `SinkFlowLifeCycle` — as I noted in my earlier review, the diff against `dev` has zero non-comment lines. The current CI failures are: - `DorisErrorIT.testDoris:85 expected: <true> but was: <false>` in `connector-doris-e2e` - a failure in `all-connectors-it-3` shard 8 - `paimon-connector-it` shard 8 got cancelled as a side effect None of these modules (`connector-doris-e2e`, the all-connectors-it aggregate, `paimon-connector-it`) touch `seatunnel-engine`/`SinkFlowLifeCycle.java`, and this PR doesn't change any Doris/Paimon/connector-aggregation code, workflow config, or shared test infra — so this reads as ordinary environmental E2E flakiness (container/network timing), not something introduced here. I don't see a specific recent `dev` fix that surgically resolves this exact `DorisErrorIT` assertion, so I wouldn't say "sync dev and it'll go green" with confidence — my honest read is this needs a plain CI retry rather than any code change on the author's side. @goutamadwant no action needed from you here — this isn't something to chase in your diff. If you have push access to trigger a rerun on your fork's failed jobs, that's the fastest path; otherwise a maintainer can rerun it. I'll take another look once CI comes back 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]
