Mike is right, this is what I get for copy pasting, then not double checking the email before I sent it.
I'd open up a discuss thread, rather than have it on the vote result thread. On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 6:59 PM Michael Miklavcic < michael.miklav...@gmail.com> wrote: > btw, it's 2 "binding" -1’s (Otto, Mike) > > I started taking a look at that PR and it looks like this isn't quite as > close to being able go in as I had originally expected. I want to talk > about options here. It seems to me that we can: > > 1. Wait for PR#1360 to go in, but this is likely going to take more time > than originally anticipated > 2. Accept the issue in full dev, but add some notes in the developer > docs about the current feature gap and why sensors aren't showing > status in > the management UI when aggregation is enabled. > 3. Find some other workable UI solution. > 4. Other option? > > All things considered, I'm personally leaning towards #2 in the short-term, > but I think we should probably talk about this a bit before deciding what > RC2 should be. > > Best, > Mike > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 4:33 PM Justin Leet <justinjl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > The vote has failed. The voting was: > > > > 2 binding +1’s (Justin, Nick) > > 2 non-binding -1’s (Otto, Mike) > > no 0’s > > > > As discussed in the release thread, any further RC's are pending the > review > > and merge of PR#1360 <https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1360> > (Parser > > aggregation UI implementation). > > > > Thanks, > > Justin > > >
