Remove unused outer queue in flatmap subscriber

[ozangunalp]

No description provided.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #975 (a9f882b) into main (8098078) will increase coverage by 0.28%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

❗ Current head a9f882b differs from pull request most recent head 17ff781. Consider uploading reports for the commit 17ff781 to get more accurate results

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main     #975      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     88.97%   89.25%   +0.28%     
- Complexity     3137     3141       +4     
============================================
  Files           412      412              
  Lines         12594    12566      -28     
  Branches       1595     1586       -9     
============================================
+ Hits          11205    11216      +11     
+ Misses          734      710      -24     
+ Partials        655      640      -15     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...mallrye/mutiny/operators/multi/MultiFlatMapOp.java	90.69% <100.00%> (+5.59%)	⬆️
.../io/smallrye/mutiny/helpers/queues/DrainUtils.java	77.77% <0.00%> (-4.45%)	⬇️
...lrye/mutiny/subscription/SerializedSubscriber.java	85.32% <0.00%> (-2.76%)	⬇️
...perators/multi/processors/SerializedProcessor.java	89.10% <0.00%> (ø)
...tiny/operators/multi/MultiBufferWithTimeoutOp.java	75.63% <0.00%> (+0.84%)	⬆️
...a/io/smallrye/mutiny/helpers/BlockingIterable.java	87.03% <0.00%> (+0.92%)	⬆️
...erators/multi/builders/SerializedMultiEmitter.java	80.48% <0.00%> (+1.21%)	⬆️
...io/smallrye/mutiny/operators/uni/UniMemoizeOp.java	93.20% <0.00%> (+1.94%)	⬆️
...ny/operators/uni/builders/UniCreateFromFuture.java	91.80% <0.00%> (+3.27%)	⬆️
... and 4 more

[cescoffier]

I've looked at the code and it seems correct. I believe I dropped the queue a few months/years ago without removing the code using that queue.

[cescoffier]

@jponge if you could have a look just in case I miss something obvious.

[jponge]

On my radar

[jponge]

Tests pass and I think we have good coverage for the various execution paths here, so I think it's correct.

[jponge]

@ozangunalp Can you please rebase?

[ozangunalp]

@jponge rebased

[jponge]

I hereby declare @ozangunalp a drain-loop expert.

[ozangunalp]

ahah wait at least until the next PR :)

[jponge]

Ah @ozangunalp we need your commits to be GnuPG-signed