I just filter on 'to:([email protected])' and skip the inbox. There's an interesting (and useful to me anyway) side-effect in Gmail- issues I'm watching still end up in my inbox because JIRA also emails me directly.
-D... On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 8:13 AM, Otto Fowler <[email protected]> wrote: > It did, I didn’t see it until later in the night though, all my jira spam > goes into one folder > and honestly, nifi issues is flooding it. I’ll have to split that out. > > Is there a metron issues list? > > > On April 26, 2017 at 08:08:59, David Lyle ([email protected]) wrote: > > Thanks Otto, the original JIRA is good. I reopened it yesterday when I had > the issue. I was hoping it would have emailed you. > > -D... > > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 8:04 AM, [email protected] <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Interesting. I found it via pony mail - > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/82e194ad8f8b8378676a28c09b074f > > 45dee82820ead6ff8ee8fbebcc@ > > <dev.metron.apache.org> > > > > But nothing in my inbox. I suspected it was @metron.incubator.apache.org > > vs @metron.apache.org but when I attempted to subscribe to the top > level > > mailing list I was told I'm already subscribed. Same with User. > > > > Jon > > > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017, 7:39 AM Justin Leet <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > I have it (and had it yesterday). Subject is: "[DISCUSS] The various > > > methods and incantations to spin up Metron". > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 7:33 AM, [email protected] <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Yeah, I don't see the other thread either. Stuck in the outbox > Casey? > > > > > > > > Jon > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017, 6:53 AM Otto Fowler <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > What other thread? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On April 25, 2017 at 19:56:56, Casey Stella ([email protected]) > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Ok, I spun up that discussion in another thread. Hopefully we can > get > > > > some > > > > > better sense about the various ways to spin up metron and a > > centralized > > > > > place to direct people to along with with guidance on when some > > > approach > > > > > would be better than another. > > > > > > > > > > I'll be honest, I've totally lost track and never really consider > > > > anything > > > > > outside of full-dev anymore since it's the one that is generally > > stable > > > > > (quick-dev gets out of date quickly because mpack changes cause it > to > > > get > > > > > stale) and is sufficient for validating PRs. Most of the other > ones > > > tend > > > > > to either not have all of the system spun up (i.e. the hadoop > > > components) > > > > > and therefore end up with me having to test in full-dev anyway or > > just > > > > > weren't apparent to me and have unknown pros and cons. ;) > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 7:21 PM, Casey Stella <[email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, I tend to agree that a rundown of the various methods and > > when > > > > you > > > > > > would use them is in order. I will say that full-dev is > especially > > > > > > important to have working since it is required for validating > PRs. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 18:56 [email protected] <[email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> Can somebody map out all of the current methods and procedures > to > > > spin > > > > > up > > > > > >> Metron components? I swear I find out about new ones every > month. > > > > > >> Metron-docker, the 4 vagrants, rpm-docker, ansible-docker, any > > > others? > > > > > >> Perhaps an agreed upon write up of when to use what would be > > > helpful. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Jon > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017, 6:17 PM Ryan Merriman < > [email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > A regression was introduced recently that breaks full dev. > I've > > > > > >> narrowed > > > > > >> > down the commit that introduced it and have submitted a PR to > > > revert > > > > > >> that > > > > > >> > commit: https://github.com/apache/incubator-metron/pull/549. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Given there has been confusion recently over our deployment > > build > > > > > >> process, > > > > > >> > I think it's appropriate that we discuss and come to a > consensus > > > and > > > > > on > > > > > >> > how this should work. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Ryan > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> -- > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Jon > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Jon > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Jon > > > >
