Github user JoshRosen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18110
FWIW I didn't actually say that we should rename that key since the cost of
the confusing name isn't that high right now. So while I don't oppose this
mechanism I'm neutral on it given that the only use case so far seems kind
of minor. I was mostly commenting just so that future readers and reviewers
can more easily spot the issue and hopefully pick better names going
forward.
On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 8:57 AM Apache Spark QA <notificati...@github.com>
wrote:
> *Test build #77372 has started
>
<https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/77372/testReport>*
> for PR 18110 at commit cc51dd0
>
<https://github.com/apache/spark/commit/cc51dd09611adb838c1ef15aaffe11d90b0b119c>
> .
>
> â
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
>
>
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18110#issuecomment-304047602>, or
mute
> the thread
>
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADGPMaYT_X0iqsDi6q5OhpOOxZpnKQzks5r9aT0gaJpZM4Nmjjt>
> .
>
---
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
