[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1781?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15296606#comment-15296606
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on NIFI-1781:
--------------------------------------
Github user markap14 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/461#discussion_r64248023
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-framework-bundle/nifi-framework/nifi-framework-core-api/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/groups/ProcessGroup.java
---
@@ -46,6 +48,26 @@
public interface ProcessGroup extends Authorizable {
/**
+ * Predicate for filtering schedulable Processors.
+ */
+ Predicate<ProcessorNode> SCHEDULABLE_PROCESSORS = node ->
!node.isRunning() && node.getScheduledState() != ScheduledState.DISABLED;
+
+ /**
+ * Predicate for filtering unschedulable Processors.
+ */
+ Predicate<ProcessorNode> UNSCHEDULABLE_PROCESSORS = node ->
node.isRunning();
+
+ /**
+ * Predicate for filtering schedulable Ports
+ */
+ Predicate<Port> SCHEDULABLE_PORTS = port -> port.getScheduledState()
!= ScheduledState.DISABLED;
+
+ /**
+ * Predicate for filtering schedulable Ports
+ */
+ Predicate<Port> UNSCHEDULABLE_PORTS = port -> port.getScheduledState()
== ScheduledState.RUNNING;
--- End diff --
Shouldn't this be "port.isRunning()" instead, like we do for Processor? It
seems like we could actually just have a SCHEDULABLE_TRIGGERABLE and an
UNSCHEDULABLE_TRIGGERABLE rather than separate ones for ports & processors?
> Update UI to reflect component level authorization
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: NIFI-1781
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1781
> Project: Apache NiFi
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: Core UI
> Reporter: Matt Gilman
> Assignee: Matt Gilman
> Fix For: 1.0.0
>
> Attachments: 0001-NIFI-1781.patch, nifi-component-samples.png,
> nifi-sample-flow.png
>
>
> - Update to UI to visual access level per component
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
