DanielLeens commented on PR #11902: URL: https://github.com/apache/seatunnel/pull/11902#issuecomment-6098024625
@goutamadwant Thanks for the clear status update, and for taking the time to keep the ABFS packaging properly relocated instead of taking a shortcut just to clear the conflict. That is the right call. I re-checked the current state so we are working from the same facts: - This PR head is still `7e410c95e6c3`, which is the one I reviewed on 2026-08-20. There is no new commit, so no new full review is needed yet. It is 435 commits behind `dev` and GitHub reports it as conflicting. - apache/seatunnel-shade#23 is still open and mergeable cleanly against `main`, with no reviews yet. I also checked Maven Central, and `seatunnel-shade-hadoop3-uber:3.1.4-3.0.1` is not published yet. - `dev` still pins `seatunnel.shade.version` to `3.0.0` and `seatunnel.shade.hadoop.version` to `3.1.4`, so the coordinate template in my earlier comment is still accurate. So the plan you described is exactly what I would suggest: wait for the shade artifact, then rebase on `dev`, drop the in-repo `seatunnel-shade/seatunnel-hadoop3-3.1.4-uber` change, consume `seatunnel-shade-hadoop3-uber` through the root `dependencyManagement`, and keep both the HDFS and ABFS provider tests. A short note on the network-avoidance flags in the test would be welcome too. Please do double-check, before bumping `seatunnel.shade.version`, that no other module has to stay on `3.0.0`. Nothing else is needed from you right now. The "Please solve PR conflicts" request in the existing review will be satisfied by that rebase. Once the shade artifact is released and this branch is updated, ping me and I will do a full end-to-end re-review. Thanks again for driving this! -- 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]
