Github user tillrohrmann commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/750#discussion_r46284702
--- Diff:
flink-clients/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/client/CliFrontend.java ---
@@ -569,6 +571,69 @@ public int compare(JobStatusMessage o1,
JobStatusMessage o2) {
}
/**
+ * Executes the STOP action.
+ *
+ * @param args Command line arguments for the stop action.
+ */
+ protected int stop(String[] args) {
+ LOG.info("Running 'stop' command.");
+
+ StopOptions options;
+ try {
+ options = CliFrontendParser.parseStopCommand(args);
+ }
+ catch (CliArgsException e) {
+ return handleArgException(e);
+ }
+ catch (Throwable t) {
+ return handleError(t);
+ }
+
+ // evaluate help flag
+ if (options.isPrintHelp()) {
+ CliFrontendParser.printHelpForStop();
+ return 0;
+ }
+
+ String[] stopArgs = options.getArgs();
+ JobID jobId;
+
+ if (stopArgs.length > 0) {
+ String jobIdString = stopArgs[0];
+ try {
+ jobId = new
JobID(StringUtils.hexStringToByte(jobIdString));
+ }
+ catch (Exception e) {
+ LOG.error("Error: The value for the Job ID is
not a valid ID.");
--- End diff --
The thing is that `handleError` was introduced after the `cancel` method
has been written. Thus at this time, it was not available, yet. So why should
we keep the deficiencies of an old implementation if we could do it better? Of
course, it would be nice to update `cancel` accordingly, but this is not part
of this PR and should happen in a different PR.
IMHO, it is better to ditch antiquated traditions if you're implementing a
new function.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
