HeartSaVioR commented on pull request #30210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/30210#issuecomment-727149697
I just initiated the discussion on dev@ mailing list which I should have
been done instead.
HeartSaVioR commented on pull request #30210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/30210#issuecomment-727149286
Sorry to all for all noises. Please disregard all conversation. I'll remove
them now.
This is an automated
HeartSaVioR commented on pull request #30210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/30210#issuecomment-727138220
I was feeling odd and became feeling upset because my intention wasn't
change from the first comment and the intention was disregarded (at least
that's what I felt like)
HeartSaVioR commented on pull request #30210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/30210#issuecomment-727121487
And I also admit I have different voice on post-review. I agree post-review
would open the possibility for reviewers to review later who weren't active
during the review
HeartSaVioR commented on pull request #30210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/30210#issuecomment-727120756
I was writing a wall of text and Chrome happily (?) killed itself. Rewriting
one.
What I really asked you to do is exactly this. The practice is also happened
for
HeartSaVioR commented on pull request #30210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/30210#issuecomment-726569827
I'd rather avoid the chance of "post-review" whenever possible, but I'd
admit everyone has different thoughts. I'm OK with it, and if that's considered
here (and no one
HeartSaVioR commented on pull request #30210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/30210#issuecomment-726433238
What do you say? I don't say you're missing the comment. I say the
confirmation is better to be done by the reviewers who review, not from some
other one. The confirmation
HeartSaVioR commented on pull request #30210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/30210#issuecomment-726428939
No that's not also my point. I don't claim about the domain owner (but in
practice I see there's implicit domain owner). You can merge the PR in SS area
without me if I
HeartSaVioR commented on pull request #30210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/30210#issuecomment-726418896
There's no indication I have produced all review comments (while actually I
produced all review comments), and review comment author would be the right one
to verify
HeartSaVioR commented on pull request #30210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/30210#issuecomment-726410128
(I hope the PR can wait for reviewers' approvals who left valid review
comments. I understand the PR can be merged "technically", but doesn't seem to
be a good practice. If
HeartSaVioR commented on pull request #30210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/30210#issuecomment-725867167
> Let's also mention the behavior change in ss-migration-guide.md
Let's make sure this review comment is also addressed as well. I just
skipped mentioning it as it's
HeartSaVioR commented on pull request #30210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/30210#issuecomment-721373759
That's the chicken and egg problem, you know. dev@ list is not so active
because all the important discussions aren't passing through the dev list,
which is I think bad in
HeartSaVioR commented on pull request #30210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/30210#issuecomment-720876379
No I don't have real case for knowing and taking the risk. Probably I could
create some query which could evade the issue, but I agree that's more likely
in theory and not
13 matches
Mail list logo
