Github user pnowojski commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/6231
I agree with @zentol and I do not see reason for supporting nulls here.
This fix looks like hiding underlying implementation problem. Default
constructor of `CRowSerializerConfigSnapshot` could use
`CompositeTypeSerializerConfigSnapshot#CompositeTypeSerializerConfigSnapshot()`
(without parameters).
I don't know much about scala, but shouldn't it use this pattern:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3299776/in-scala-how-can-i-subclass-a-java-class-with-multiple-constructors
?
---
