Github user holdenk commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/16537
I think the overhead of doing this piecemeal removes review time available
for more important changes (like places where users are actively encountering
confusing error messages, incorrect behaviour, or missing functionality for
Scala parity).
As illustrated by your confusion about the purpose of the PR, there are
other outstanding PRs adding similar checks in other places and @zero323 is
already familiar with the code base hence my suggestion that they look at a
more scalable solution (from the point of view of review time).
Of course this is just a personal request that we look at solving this in a
less piecemeal way to reduce review overhead (and a biased one at that), but
I'll probably triage these issues as less important unless there is a clear
link to a user issue - (except from new contributors getting familiar with the
code base which is valuable in other ways too).
That being said this discussion has gotten pretty off topic from the point
of view of this individual PR and we should maybe move it to the JIRA or lists
if we want to continue it (but personally I think we are at an agree to
disagree about priorities and no one is obliged to listen to my priorities :)).
---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
