Sounds good. Yes Matt, I will handle my parts now. Thanks everyone Jon
On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 2:32 PM Matt Foley <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > I can start the release process tonight. > > > > Jon, you mentioned you want to commit > > > https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/847 and > > https://github.com/apache/metron-bro-plugin-kafka/pull/4 > > before the release. Is it convenient for you to do so today? > > > > Thanks, > > --Matt > > > > From: Nick Allen <n...@nickallen.org> > Date: Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 10:13 AM > To: "dev@metron.apache.org" <dev@metron.apache.org> > Cc: Matt Foley <ma...@apache.org> > Subject: Re: [MENTORS][DISCUSS] Release Procedure + 'Kafka Plugin for Bro' > > > > I am more interested in getting a release cut. If me moving to the (a) > camp gets us to consensus and cuts a release faster, then I'll do it. > Let's get this release train moving. > > > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 11:44 AM, Justin Leet <justinjl...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Do we have any further discussion on this? Pardon me if I misstate > anyone's position, but it seems like we have a couple people (Otto and Jon > and slightly Matt?) in favor of (a), Nick in favor of (b), and presumably a > section of people like myself without a particular horse in the race. > > It seems like we need to come to some sort of consensus so that we can get > the release bus moving again, and right now it seems like (a) is gathering > more explicit support. Do we have a compelling reason to not do (a)? To be > honest, my main worry is more "If we do (a) are we going to be miserable if > we need to iterate or adjust?" I'm not seeing anything that suggests > anything too terrible, so unless we see some more discussion, I suggest we > move forward with (a). > > > On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 9:34 PM, zeo...@gmail.com <zeo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I would prefer a, but I was initially thinking of doing the plugin first > > and then get in the two PRs out to use this new tag, which are already > +1'd > > and just waiting on this conversation. For reference, > > https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/847 and > > https://github.com/apache/metron-bro-plugin-kafka/pull/4 > > > > Jon > > > > On Mon, Dec 4, 2017, 20:54 Otto Fowler <ottobackwa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > It seems to me, as I believe I have stated before that a) feels like > the > > > proper way to handle this. It is how I have seen other projects like > > NiFi > > > handle things as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > On December 4, 2017 at 17:14:41, Matt Foley (ma...@apache.org) wrote: > > > > > > Okay, looking at this from the perspective of making a release: > > > > > > > > > > > > We have two choices: > > > > > > a) I can simply make a 0.1 (or 1.0 or 0.4.2) release of > > > metron-bro-plugin-kafka, at the same time and using the same process > > > (modulo the necessary) as Metron. This is dirt simple. > > > > > > b) I or someone needs to: > > > > > > - open a jira, > > > > > > - add the submodule to the Metron code tree, > > > > > > - possibly (optionally) add build mechanism to the maven poms, and > > > > > > - document as much as we think appropriate regarding what it is, > how > > to > > > build it, and how to update it, > > > > > > and commit that before the 0.4.2 release. > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the will of the community? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > --Matt > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Nick Allen <n...@nickallen.org> > > > Reply-To: "dev@metron.apache.org" <dev@metron.apache.org> > > > Date: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 at 9:09 AM > > > To: "dev@metron.apache.org" <dev@metron.apache.org> > > > Subject: Re: [MENTORS][DISCUSS] Release Procedure + 'Kafka Plugin for > > Bro' > > > > > > > > > > > > I'll add a bit to Jon's technical comments. > > > > > > > > > > > > * We only created a separate repo because it was a technical > requirement > > to > > > leverage the bro-pkg mechanism. > > > > > > * Leveraging the new bro-pkg mechanism has many advantages as outlined > by > > > Jon. > > > > > > * Enabling the bro-pkg mechanism is backwards compatible. I can install > > the > > > plugin exactly how we use to. > > > > > > > > > > > > While I agree with Jon's technical comments, I disagree with the > > > non-technical ones. > > > > > > > > > > > > (1) I do not want to change our release management process. While we > > needed > > > to make a new repo (a technical change), I did not want that to change > > how > > > we operate as a community (our procedures, policies, versioning and > > release > > > cycles). > > > > > > > > > > > > (2) I see no value in adopting a separate release management process > for > > > the Bro plugin alone. Having a separate release process does not make > the > > > plugin *more* available to the Bro community. > > > > > > > > > > > > (3) I also see no value in positioning the plugin to be spun-out of the > > > Metron project. It is a part of Metron and I want to see it benefit and > > > evolve "the Apache-way". > > > > > > > > > > > > In my mind, the best way to accommodate the additional repo, while > > > minimizing changes to our release management process, is to treat the > new > > > repo as a submodule. I fail to see significant downsides to this > > approach. > > > A few extract command-line options do not seem overly onerous to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > Many thanks go to Jon for all the hard work he has put in enhancing the > > > plugin. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 10:07 PM, zeo...@gmail.com <zeo...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > In an attempt to keep this from becoming unbearably long, I will try to > > > keep my responses short, but I would be happy to elaborate. That's a > > fairly > > > good timeline and summary, but here are some clarifications in > > > corresponding order: > > > > > > > > > > > > - The plugin history is quite short and you can probably get a good bit > > of > > > context just by looking at the commits. > > > > > > - The plugin is only useful to the bro community, but it is rather > > popular. > > > > > > - The Bro team created the idea of bro packages, which can include bro > > > plugins, bro scripts, or BroControl plugins. So, instead of having a > > > 'plugins' repo, they moved to have a 'packages' repo which is by > default > > > referenced by a bro-pkg tool they wrote for package management. > > > > > > - I believe I kicked this off (or at least I did in my head) when I > > started > > > complaining about the plugin divergence that occurred due to the move > to > > > bro/plugins (the right move at the time), but Metron's use of a local > > > directory that hadn't been kept up to date. My current efforts are an > > > attempt to make sure this doesn't happen again, and to take advantage > of > > > the bro-pkg benefits. > > > > > > - The gap between ~3/31 and actual progress on 11/12 is completely on > me > > - > > > I had intentions of doing this work sooner but failed to do so. > > > > > > - You can most definitely still install/use the bro plugin without > using > > > bro-pkg. In fact, the README in my PR still has the instructions on how > > to > > > do so. > > > > > > > > > > > > Q1: The simple explanation is that the only thing that makes a plugin a > > bro > > > package is the inclusion of a bro-pkg.meta file, and it includes a > > > build_command which could easily be manually performed to install by > hand > > > (assuming dependencies are met). > > > > > > > > > > > > I've worked with other projects that use submodules and while I'm fine > > > discussing it, I suggest that we don't implement it. I put together a > > quick > > > example of why here[1], using the bro project as an example since it's > > top > > > of mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > Q2: I think the answer to Q1 answers this. There is absolutely nothing > > > stopping a git clone && cd $dir && configure && make && make install, > but > > > using bro-pkg to install/load takes into account dependencies and unit > > > tests when it is loaded (and thus fails early and more intuitively). It > > > only must be a separate repo (or, more technically correct, a git > branch > > > that includes only the package) because of how bro-pkg works. If you'd > > like > > > to get an idea of how this would work in application for Bro users, you > > can > > > see my test instructions here (specifically step #3). If a 0.1 tag gets > > > pushed to apache/metron-bro-plugin-kafka, the command could be `bro-pkg > > > install metron-bro-plugin-kafka --version 0.1` or `bro-pkg install > > > apache/metron-bro-plugin-kafka --version 0.1` due to this (the --force > is > > > just to remove user interaction, for an ansible spin-up). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1: To clone the Bro git repo, you must run `git clone --recursive > > > https://github.com/bro/bro` <https://github.com/bro/bro> < > https://github.com/bro/bro> (note the > > > --recursive). Not too big of a deal, > > > but requires that you remember it and existing instructions/blog posts > > may > > > give users inaccurate steps. Let's make this worse and try to checkout > > > their latest release, v2.5.2, and automatically update the submodules > > > appropriately via `git checkout v2.5.2 --recurse-submodules`. This > fails > > > because aux/plugins (https://github.com/bro/plugins) was removed since > > > their latest release. Okay, we can work around this using `git checkout > > > v2.5.2` and then remember to `git submodule update` every time you > > checkout > > > a release or branch. But because they have nested submodules, we > actually > > > need to run `git submodule update --recursive`. I can't imagine opting > > into > > > a workflow anything like this. There are other options as well, such as > > git > > > subtrees, but those I am less familiar with. > > > > > > > > > > > > Jon > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 8:59 PM Otto Fowler <ottobackwa...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > I am not sure that our use of the plugin necessarily equates to it > being > > > implicitly coupled to Metron. It seems like the Right Thing To Do, esp. > > > for an Apache project would be to make this available for use by the > > > greater bro community. > > > Unless we expect to do extensive iterative work on the plugin, which > > would > > > then make the decision to spin it out now premature. > > > > > > Then again, I might be wrong ;) > > > > > > > > > On November 27, 2017 at 19:58:11, Matt Foley (ma...@apache.org) wrote: > > > > > > [Please pardon me that the below is a little labored. I’m trying to > > > understand the implications for both release and use, which requires > some > > > explanation as well as the two questions needed. Q1 and Q2 below are > > > probably the same question, asked in slightly different contexts. > Please > > > consider them together.] > > > > > > So this made me go back and look at the history that caused us to put > the > > > bro plugin in a separate repo. As best I can see, this was in > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-813 , which cites an > email > > > discussion thread. Also please see > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-883 for background on the > > > plugin itself. > > > > > > As best I can assemble the many bits brought up in the threads, the > > reasons > > > to put it in a separate repo was: > > > - The plugin was thought to be useful to multiple clients of bro and > > kafka, > > > including Storm and Spark, as well as Metron. > > > - Originally the bro project was maintaining bro plugins and it was > > thought > > > they might adopt this one. > > > - Bro then formalized their plugin framework BUT dumped all plugins out > > of > > > their sphere of maintenance. > > > - As of 3/31/2017, Nick said that “the [bro] package mechanism requires > > > that a package live within its own repo”. Jon said “the bro packages > > model > > > doesn't allow colocation with anything else.” > > > - So on 3/31 Jon opened METRON-813, and the metron-bro-plugin-kafka > repo > > > was created a few days later. But Metron wasn’t actually modified to > > remove > > > the metron-sensors/bro-plugin-kafka/ subdirectory and start using the > > > plugin from the metron-bro-plugin-kafka repo until Nov 12 – two weeks > > ago! > > > – with https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-1309 . > > > - Presumably the need to have metron-bro-plugin-kafka in a separate > repo > > > remain valid, if the bro plugin mechanism is used. But obviously there > > are > > > (non-conforming) ways to build the plugin as part of metron, and > install > > it > > > in a way that works. > > > > > > Q1. I think that last statement needs some explanation. Nick or Jon, > can > > > you please expand on it, especially wrt how the end user installs the > > > plugin once the plugin is built the two different ways? And whether > it’s > > > still valuable to have a separate repo for the plugin? > > > > > > Nick suggests using a submodule approach to managing the bro plugin, > for > > > Metron versioning purposes. As I understand it, this would continue the > > > existence of the metron-bro-plugin-kafka repo, but copy it into the > > metron > > > code tree for building, versioning, and release purposes. Git > submodules > > > are documented here: > https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Tools-Submodules > > . > > > We would use the submodule capability to clone the > > metron-bro-plugin-kafka > > > source code into a subdirectory of Metron at the time one clones the > > metron > > > repo. It would then be released with Metron as part of the source code > > > release for a given version of Metron. Part of the way submodules are > > > managed, is that git stores the SHA1 hash of the submodule into a file > > > named .gitmodules, which in turn gets saved when you do a git push. So > > > indeed submodules would ensure that everyone cloning a given version of > > > metron would get the expected “version” (sha, actually) of > > > metron-bro-plugin-kafka. > > > > > > This sounds like a good idea, although it isn’t without cost. > Submodules > > > impose the need for additional commands to actually get a copy of the > > > submodule source, and if the plugin repo advanced beyond the version > in a > > > metron repo, it causes some ‘git status’ artifacts that could be > > confusing > > > to folks who aren’t familiar with submodules. But these can be > > documented. > > > > > > Q2. Nick, what I’m not clear about is the process by which the > > > metron-bro-plugin-kafka would be built and “plugged in” by (a) metron > > > developers, and (b) end users. If it “must” be in a separate repo to be > > > successfully built and managed by the bro plugin mechanism, does that > > mean > > > it can’t be built from the copy in the Metron source tree? Yet until > > > November, that’s exactly what we were doing. Do we go back to doing > that? > > > What does that mean wrt users installing the plugin? > > > > > > Thanks for your patience in reading this far. > > > --Matt > > > > > > > > > On 11/27/17, 2:58 PM, "James Sirota" <jsir...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > I agree with Nick. Since the plugin is tightly coupled with Metron why > > not > > > just pull it into the main repo and version it with the rest of the > code? > > > Do we really need the second repo for the plug-in? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > James > > > > > > > > > > > > 16.11.2017, 08:06, "Nick Allen" <n...@nickallen.org>: > > > >> I would suggest that we institute a release procedure for the > package > > > >> itself, but I don't think it necessarily has to line up with metron > > > >> releases (happy to be persuaded otherwise). Then we can just link > > metron > > > >> to metron-bro-plugin-kafka by pointing to specific > > > >> metron-bro-plugin-kafka releases (git tags > > > >> < > > > http://bro-package-manager.readthedocs.io/en/stable/ > > package.html#package- > > > >> versioning> > > > >> ). > > > >> Right now, full-dev spins up against the > > > >> apache/metron-bro-plugin-kafka master branch, which is not a good > idea > > > to > > > >> have in place for an upcoming release. That is the crux of why I > think > > > we > > > >> need to finalize the move to bro 2.5.2 and the plugin packaging > before > > > our > > > >> next release (working on it as we speak). > > > >> Jon > > > > > > > > I replayed Jon's comments from the other thread above. > > > > > > > > My initial thought, is that I would not want to manage two separate > > > release > > > > processes. I don't want to have a roll call, cut release candidates > and > > > > test both. > > > > > > > > I was thinking we would just need to change some of the > > behind-the-scenes > > > > processes handled by the release manager. This is one area where I > had > > > > thought using a submodule in Git would help. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Nick Allen <n...@nickallen.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> + Restarting the thread to include mentors. > > > >> > > > >> The code of the 'Kafka Plugin for Bro' is now maintained in the > > external > > > >> repository that we set up a while back. > > > >> > > > >> - Metron Core: git://git.apache.org/metron.git > > > >> - Kafka Plugin for Bro: git://git.apache.org/ > > > >> metron-bro-plugin-kafka.git > > > >> > > > >> (Q) Do we need to change anything in the release procedure to > account > > > for > > > >> this? > > > > > > ------------------- > > > Thank you, > > > > > > James Sirota > > > PMC- Apache Metron > > > jsirota AT apache DOT org > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Jon > > > > > -- > > > > Jon > > > > > > -- Jon
