-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 319
Backport AutoValue integration #239
Backport AutoValue integration #239
Conversation
|
Travis failure seems to be a flake:
PTAL @lukecwik |
|
Do we need this backport? |
|
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. |
|
Sure; ok to proceed with caution. |
|
I've addressed all feedback so far. Please take another look. @lukecwik |
pom.xml
Outdated
| </goals> | ||
| </execution> | ||
| </executions> | ||
| <configuration> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please fix indentation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Note: this has already been addressed in BEAM via apache/beam@119812a
0186d0b to
c5be5fe
Compare
|
I've addressed all feedback so far. Please take another look. @lukecwik |
1 similar comment
|
I've addressed all feedback so far. Please take another look. @lukecwik |
|
LGTM |
|
Waiting on travis and then will merge. |
|
Can you sync your PR since there is a merge conflict now? |
6dbf2bd to
c6ea95b
Compare
|
done. @lukecwik |
No description provided.