DanielLeens commented on PR #11960: URL: https://github.com/apache/seatunnel/pull/11960#issuecomment-5421769224
Agreed that's the right sequencing — settle on one coordination model first, then treat whichever pieces of the other PR still add value (this PR's producer/sequence IDs and replay handling, or #11912's writer-local refresh separation) as follow-up hardening on top of that choice, rather than reviewing two competing implementations in parallel. To be clear, this doesn't change where #11960 itself stands: Issue 1 from my review (the missing `incompatible-changes.md` entry for the checkpoint/savepoint state-format change) is still the one blocking item on this PR regardless of how the #11912 discussion resolves. -- 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]
