DanielLeens commented on PR #11613: URL: https://github.com/apache/seatunnel/pull/11613#issuecomment-5713025065
Sorry for the confusion — point 5 wasn't cut off, I just grouped F1/F5/F7/F8 into one line because they're all the same category (docs completeness) and I had the same non-blocking stance on all four. Here's each one individually, so nothing is ambiguous: - **F1** (misleading key name in the `/update-tags` flat example): agree it should be fixed, non-blocking. - **F5** (dedicated `/update-local-member-tags` section with request/response/error examples): agree it should be added, non-blocking. - **F7** (per-field descriptions + a consistent example port for `/http-service/status`): agree it should be added, non-blocking. - **F8** (updated screenshots for Action controls, Submit Job panel, Checkpoints tab, Operations page): agree, non-blocking — dropping the stale ones is also acceptable if refreshing them all isn't practical right now. None of these are in the diff as of the current head (`a947704b`), so they're still open asks either way. Whether @danielnadean folds them into this PR now or ships them as a fast follow-up is the author's call — I won't block merge on any of the four, same as I said for F2 last round. On **F6**: agreed with your framing — a server-side guard (reject restore while the source job is still RUNNING, clear error if the checkpoint/savepoint state no longer exists) is the better outcome, and a documented "Limitations" note is an acceptable minimum for this PR. That one I would like to see resolved one way or the other before I'd call this fully closed out, even though it's not a regression this PR introduced. Thanks for pushing on this — appreciate the precision. -- 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]
