https://github.com/apache/incubator-metron/pull/552


On April 26, 2017 at 08:13:26, 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 (quick-dev gets out of date quickly because mpack changes cause it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
>

Reply via email to