eolivelli commented on issue #1509: solve #1476 issue.
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1509#issuecomment-396344562
@sijie sure, go ahead.
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To
eolivelli commented on issue #1509: solve #1476 issue.
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1509#issuecomment-396343230
So @sijie you are saying that we have some code path not covered by test
cases.
It would be good to have minimal coverage of this change, just by using
eolivelli commented on issue #1509: solve #1476 issue.
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1509#issuecomment-396171716
@infodog I see your description.
It is better to fix the first known issue with your current work, then you
will create a follow up issue if this is no
eolivelli commented on issue #1509: solve #1476 issue.
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1509#issuecomment-396057469
Thank you @infodog for looking into this.
How can you prove the fix addresses the problem?
Is there any test case we can add in order ensure wr won't
