namanjain24-sudo commented on PR #25090:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/25090#issuecomment-5638196686

   @alamb could a committer approve the workflows on this PR and on #25091? 
Both were opened on 2026-09-08 and neither has had a single check run since. 
The one green mark on each is the `Process` labeler — `Rust`, `Dev`, `CodeQL`, 
`Dependencies`, `Detect breaking changes` and `Large files PR check` are all 
sitting at `action_required`.
   
   I asked on #25191 a few hours ago rather than pinging the same reviewers 
repeatedly, so I'm folding these two into one request here instead of opening a 
third thread.
   
   Both are rebased onto current `main`, no conflicts, one commit each. On the 
rebased commits, `cargo test -p datafusion-substrait` passes on both — 272 
tests, 0 failures.
   
   They are small and independent:
   
   - **This PR** (#25090, closes #25049) — one file, +53/−3. Sets 
`AggregateFunction.output_type` from the logical expression's field, the same 
path scalar functions already use.
   - **#25091** (closes #25042) — narrows intersection output nullability to 
the AND of the inputs, per the Substrait set-operation rules.
   
   Happy to rework either if you'd prefer a different approach. And if 
approving workflows on fork PRs is itself part of what #25148 is trying to 
reduce, I'm fine with these waiting until there's a decision there — just 
wanted to flag that they aren't stalled on anything I can fix from my side.
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to