DanielLeens commented on PR #11307: URL: https://github.com/apache/seatunnel/pull/11307#issuecomment-5601268495
Thanks for the ping, @goutamadwant. I verified this myself rather than just taking "builds are clean" at face value, since my last comment (Sept 5) was specifically asking for a clean rerun after the previous attempt came back `cancelled` (not pass/fail) on this exact head. **CI verification on the current head (`169864a0be9`):** the fork run I was tracking (`https://github.com/goutamadwant/seatunnel/actions/runs/33731860742`) is now on `run_attempt=5`, completed at `2026-09-09T04:20:13Z`, overall `conclusion=success`. I pulled the job-level breakdown directly rather than trusting the run summary: **79 jobs succeeded, 10 skipped as expected, 0 failed, 0 cancelled.** That's a genuinely clean, complete run — not the truncated/cancelled run I flagged last time. The apache-side `Build` check rollup also reads `SUCCESS`, consistent with this. So: CI is green, confirmed. **Source-level status:** this matches my last full review (Sept 3, on this same head) — no blockers from my side. That review already covered, and independently re-verified from source: the additive `seatunnel-spark-3.5-starter` module leaving the existing Spark 3.3 starter byte-for-byte untouched, the `SparkRowEncoder` reflection shim's exception handling, the pom/assembly/dist wiring for the new starter jar, and the Druid decimal-precision E2E fixture fix from the last round (which I'd originally mischaracterized as an unrelated flake — my apology for that stands). The one remaining item is Issue 1 from that review: `SparkStarter.SPARK_35_STARTER_JAR_NAME` and the shell script's `APP_JAR_NAME` duplicate the same jar-name literal with no single source of truth (`SparkStarter.java:61`, `start-seatunnel-spark-3.5-connector-v2.sh:38`) — Low severity, cosmetic, non-blocking, safe to leave as a fast-follow rather than holding this up. **Bottom line:** with CI now genuinely green and no outstanding source-side blockers, I don't have anything left to request here — this is ready to merge from my side. My account is comment-only on this repo, so a write-permission maintainer still needs to give the actual approving review/merge; tagging that as the next step rather than something I can complete myself. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
