[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3449?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=14989617#comment-14989617
]
Marcel Reutegger commented on OAK-3449:
---
[~reschke], you committed the patch already a while ago:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3449?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=14989738#comment-14989738
]
Julian Reschke commented on OAK-3449:
-
...actually, it's a series of changes.
1.2 and 1.0 do not have
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3449?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=14943031#comment-14943031
]
Stefan Egli commented on OAK-3449:
--
Would that mean the instanceId can be set on the builder and the
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3449?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=14943039#comment-14943039
]
Julian Reschke commented on OAK-3449:
-
It would have been, but Marcel convinced me not to.
>
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3449?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=14943061#comment-14943061
]
Marcel Reutegger commented on OAK-3449:
---
So far I didn't see a use case for specifying the instanceId
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3449?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=14910121#comment-14910121
]
Marcel Reutegger commented on OAK-3449:
---
I would actually prefer a solution where the clusterId set in
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3449?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=14910146#comment-14910146
]
Julian Reschke commented on OAK-3449:
-
Let's consider the problem the hardwired clusterId is supposed to
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3449?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=14907992#comment-14907992
]
Julian Reschke commented on OAK-3449:
-
Currently there is some code that assumes that the given cluster
