> but that we'd otherwise have had to do for OAK-3935, right? True :) > As deleting sling.id.file is still required and > likely a separate task, as that's on a sling level and you can't combine > that into the oak-run tool from a separation of concern pov. > I just realised that most probably I mis-understood sling id file as cluster id... while I think that's persistent instance id, right? In that case, it of course won't be a good idea to connect those 2 concepts -- cluster id and instance id (even if it was all being done inside oak)
Thanks, Vikas
