Github user vasia commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/669#issuecomment-104174485
Hey @aljoscha,
it seems this is one needed for the Gelly Scala API :-)
Shall I go ahead and merge it?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this
Github user aljoscha commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/669#issuecomment-104182293
I didn't want to merge it without any comments. But please, go ahead.
:smile:
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user StephanEwen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/669#issuecomment-104204248
It would be good to share a bit of information beyond `Some fixes for Scala
type analysis` about what is actually changed. Then others could think about
possible
Github user aljoscha commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/669#issuecomment-104207389
This excludes static fields in Scala Pojo analysis (because static fields
should not be serialised/deserializerd), removes legacy code from Scala Type
Descriptors and
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/669
---
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
Github user aljoscha commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/669#issuecomment-103036619
Any comments? Do we want this?
---
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
GitHub user aljoscha opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/669
Some fixes for Scala type analysis
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/aljoscha/flink scala-type-analysis-fix
Alternatively you
