SiriusTL666 commented on PR #12974:
URL: https://github.com/apache/seatunnel/pull/12974#issuecomment-6464001347

   Rebase done. New head is **`efe79431`** (was `fcac22db`). `mergeable` is 
back to `true`.
   
   **What I did**
   
   Rebased onto current `dev`. The only files that needed a manual decision 
were the two upgrade-notes files, where `dev` had added its own entries at the 
same insertion point. I kept both sides in upstream-first order, so the Socket 
entry now sits after the entries that landed in the meantime:
   
   - EN: `JDBC MySQL: DATETIME writes preserve local date/time fields`, `Doris 
and StarRocks sources: a null MAP or ROW column ...`, then `Socket connector: 
connections now have a 10-second connect timeout by default`
   - ZH: same three, in the same order
   
   No source file, test, or connector doc conflicted. The diff against `dev` is 
still **15 files, +324/-9** — identical to what you reviewed.
   
   **Re-verified on the new head**
   
   JDK 17, `connector-socket`, after the rebase: **16/16 pass** 
(`SocketFactoryTest` 11, `SocketSourceReaderTest` 5), same as before the 
rebase. `pom.xml` restored, working tree clean.
   
   **What this means for the approval**
   
   The head moved, so the earlier Build result on `fcac22db` does not carry 
over — @davidzollo, the `Build` check will need to run once against `efe79431`. 
I would rather say that plainly than let a stale green stand in for the new 
head. The rebase touched only documentation ordering; the code and tests are 
byte-identical to what you reviewed and approved.
   
   Sorry for the churn. I raised it here first specifically because I had 
committed to leaving the branch alone, and I did not want to change the head 
silently.
   


-- 
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]

Reply via email to