[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2937?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16354814#comment-16354814
]
Jungtaek Lim commented on STORM-2937:
-------------------------------------
[~erikdw]
{quote}The main difference in my strategy being that I plan to have a commit of
what was manually copied back without thought or changes, and then a separate
commit of what I did to fix these various issues.
{quote}
That also comes from difference of the standard of unit of commit between you
and me. I wouldn't see commit which doesn't compile. Ideally I wouldn't see
commit either which doesn't pass tests, but life is not easy. :) Your commit
list is even OK for me while reviewing, but if I have a chance to merge
whatever way I want, I might request squashing at the end to meet the standard
for me.
I think that can be sorted out in review phase with hearing others voices as
well. Please take any approach you feel convenient. Thanks again for taking up
hard work!
> Overwrite storm-kafka-client 1.x-branch into 1.0.x-branch
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: STORM-2937
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2937
> Project: Apache Storm
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: storm-kafka-client
> Affects Versions: 1.0.6
> Reporter: Jungtaek Lim
> Assignee: Erik Weathers
> Priority: Blocker
>
> This is to track the effort of syncing up divergence between
> storm-kafka-client 1.x-branch and 1.0.x-branch so that critical fixes can be
> go in 1.0.x-branch as well.
> Note that it can modify storm-core as well (unlikely in a
> backwards-incompatible way but not 100% sure), so we should make a decision
> whether we allow the change in bugfix version line.
> Linking discussion thread:
> [https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/0451fed132bb982b618d9e0780282a87554f1bc5747827599f276944@%3Cdev.storm.apache.org%3E]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
