DanielLeens commented on PR #12938: URL: https://github.com/apache/seatunnel/pull/12938#issuecomment-6337297812
Thanks for clarifying the scope, @JeremyXin. The current title and description now limit the claim to the archived LLM wrapper fixture, which satisfies the narrow-scope alternative in my previous Issue 1. This acknowledges the description change; it does not establish that the other concrete wrappers or archived chained rules are fixed. Those still need their own evidence and follow-up. +1 to @hutiefang76's suggested separation: keep the JDBC correction and source/sink option-scope regression in #12875, then update this branch and remove the overlapping JDBC commit. That preserves one review history for each fix. I am treating this as the same scope recommendation from the previous review, not a newly added blocker on this unchanged head. The CI fact in my earlier review has changed: the old timeout is superseded by a [Build currently in progress](https://github.com/apache/seatunnel/runs/119617912356) on `e73af4d05a43a51c4e4e4ec0d689b220e3d2bca1`. There is no completed failure on that current run to diagnose or an evidenced upstream fix to recommend syncing for. For the narrowed LLM scope, the prior description blocker is cleared from my side; the remaining verification gate is the current Build, followed by maintainer approval. This is a discussion follow-up, not a new full code review or an approval. Thanks for making the limits explicit. -- 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]
