Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Backport AutoValue integration - #239
Conversation
swegner
commented
May 4, 2016
swegner
commented
May 4, 2016
Travis failure seems to be a flake:
PTAL @lukecwik |
davorbonaci
commented
May 4, 2016
Do we need this backport? |
swegner
commented
May 4, 2016
re: @davorbonaci
There have been a number of backported changes that needed manual merge work to un-AutoValue them, and @tgroh mentioned he has more in the pipeline. This isn't strictly required but should be relatively low-risk and make other backports easier. |
davorbonaci
commented
May 7, 2016
Sure; ok to proceed with caution. |
swegner
commented
May 9, 2016
I've addressed all feedback so far. Please take another look. @lukecwik |
| </goals> | ||
| </execution> | ||
| </executions> | ||
| <configuration> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note: this has already been addressed in BEAM via apache/beam@119812a
swegner
commented
May 9, 2016
I've addressed all feedback so far. Please take another look. @lukecwik |
1 similar comment
swegner
commented
May 9, 2016
I've addressed all feedback so far. Please take another look. @lukecwik |
lukecwik
commented
May 9, 2016
LGTM |
lukecwik
commented
May 9, 2016
Waiting on travis and then will merge. |
lukecwik
commented
May 9, 2016
Can you sync your PR since there is a merge conflict now? |
swegner
commented
May 9, 2016
done. @lukecwik |
No description provided.