Ah awesome, I do not about that, thanks for letting me know. Mea culpa from me.
I think I saw only couple cases but thought I raise the discussions before I forgot =P Thanks for addressing this so quickly, Stephan. - Henry On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 8:09 AM, Stephan Ewen <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey Henry! > > For pull request 344, I merged it, because I had already built a fix on top > of it while discussion was going on. > > Here is the commit that addresses actually all comments in the discussion > (plus a bit more) > https://github.com/apache/flink/commit/56b7f85b4f6d522765df19a9710a098092ccde56 > > It is applied two commits later than the pull request commit. > It is true that I forgot to mirror that back into teh discussion. My bad! > > If you think that is happening for more pull requests, then please raise > the issue, because that certainly should not happen. > > Greetings, > Stephan > > > On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Henry Saputra <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> HI All, >> >> I'd like to bring up a bit concerning flow I am start seeing in the few >> PRs. >> >> I see some PRs had been rush to commit without addressing ALL comments >> in the PR review. >> For latest example is the comments Till and I made about using Option >> instead of null [1] for Max's PR. >> It is responsibility of the PR creator to address comment raise up in >> the PR before any commiter could merge it. No need to rush it. >> >> Would like to see this more to make sure PRs' issue or concerns are >> addressed. >> >> Thanks, >> >> - Henry >> >> [1] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/344 >>
