DanielLeens commented on PR #12867: URL: https://github.com/apache/seatunnel/pull/12867#issuecomment-6282869118
Thanks for the follow-up, @hutiefang76. Recording the shorter-`old` malformed-message case as a separate follow-up works for me: I agree it is pre-existing (the old code made the same `oldNode.get(i)` call) and not something this PR needs to change. On CI: the apache-side `Build` check for `dd51b950` is still `action_required` and there is no run in the fork for this head, so there is no CI verdict yet. I cannot approve or dispatch the workflow from my side. Two things that may help: (1) in the fork, check Settings > Actions > General and make sure Actions are allowed to run, then run the `Build` workflow from the fork's Actions tab (or push an empty commit); the HTTP 422 you saw suggests the fork-level setting is what is rejecting the dispatch; (2) a maintainer can approve the pending run on the apache side. The branch is also 8 commits behind `dev`, so it would be good to sync once before the run, and to expect the small rebase with #12866 and #12870 that I mentioned earlier. My review conclusion on the code is unchanged: no source-level blocker, the remaining gate is a green `Build` on the final head. -- 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]
