I am totally good with such things being added until we declare an rc. Right now testing is too fruitful in finding bugs that are pretty important to address. Given avail reviewer and willingness to push I am favorable.
We can also do incremental releases if needed. So we do need to draw a line. But this one seems well discussed and handled. If there is controversy then that is another matter. On Dec 2, 2015 7:28 PM, "Tony Kurc" <[email protected]> wrote: > So where do tickets like NIFI-1234 belong? A bug with a ready patch? > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:44 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Sorry it was late :-) > > > > I simply mean the RC is totally available to be kicked out. But I'd > > like to see folks test the master a bit more before then. We just got > > all the tickets closed so I'd like to see us slow it a bit to ensure > > folks are really able to spend good time testing. > > > > Thanks > > Joe > > > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote: > > > "Before I kick out Apache NiFi 0.4.0 RC1 I propose we spend a day or so > > > doing the same sort of items we would have and if it is quiet-ish then > > > we proceed with putting out an RC. " > > > > > > we would have if what? > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> Team, > > >> > > >> As you can see here [1] we are 'done' as far as 0.4.0 known tickets > > >> go. I am ready to create the RC and would love to do so. > > >> > > >> Before I kick out Apache NiFi 0.4.0 RC1 I propose we spend a day or so > > >> doing the same sort of items we would have and if it is quiet-ish then > > >> we proceed with putting out an RC. There are a tremendous amount of > > >> tickets/items involved in this release [2] with a few that are rather > > >> substantive changes/features such as [3] for example. > > >> > > >> [1] > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1237?jql=project%20%3D%20NIFI%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.4.0%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%20due%20ASC%2C%20priority%20DESC%2C%20created%20ASC > > >> > > >> [2] > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1122?jql=project%20%3D%20NIFI%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.4.0%20ORDER%20BY%20due%20ASC%2C%20priority%20DESC%2C%20created%20ASC > > >> > > >> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-655 > > >> > > >> Thanks > > >> Joe > > >> > > >> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Tony Kurc <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > FWIW I submitted at patch for lineendings that I don't believe will > > >> > conflict with NIFI-655 > > >> > On Nov 20, 2015 8:57 AM, "Joe Witt" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> Getting closer! > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1122?jql=project%20%3D%20NIFI%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.4.0%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%20due%20ASC%2C%20priority%20DESC%2C%20created%20ASC > > >> >> > > >> >> Key stuff left: > > >> >> - Wrap up NIFI-655 uname/pword stuff > > >> >> - Make the kafka client config a little more flexible > > >> >> - Make the user experience better for processors requiring input > > >> >> - Fix up the tail file stuff which we all now appreciate as being > > >> >> extraordinarily edge case challenged > > >> >> > > >> >> Then > > >> >> - Tony fixes line endings (except for tests which require specific > > >> endings) > > >> >> - I will do RM to kick out RC > > >> >> - We all do focused testing > > >> >> - We do the vote > > >> >> > > >> >> We're a little behind the ideal timeline but these are definitely > > >> >> things worth waiting for and we're still finding bugs during > testing. > > >> >> Once the popcorn stops popping as much (so to speak) we can zero in > > on > > >> >> a release. > > >> >> > > >> >> Thanks > > >> >> Joe > > >> >> > > >> >> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Joe Percivall > > >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> > Per NiFi-1165: a discussion is occurring on the ticket: > > >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1165 > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Overall, most of the issues are identified and pending a fix from > > >> Mark, > > >> >> Oleg and I. The issues were encountered on two different windows 8 > > >> machines > > >> >> by me and on windows 2012 R2 by Mark. My configuration is maven > 3.3.3 > > >> and > > >> >> Java 1.8.0_45 (on the machine I have in front of me). > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Should have a patch resolving the issues in the next couple days. > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Joe > > >> >> > > > >> >> > - - - - - - Joseph Percivall > > >> >> > linkedin.com/in/Percivall > > >> >> > e: [email protected] > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > On Monday, November 16, 2015 10:42 AM, Sean Busbey < > > >> [email protected]> > > >> >> wrote: > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > re: NIFI-1165 I also have a windows 7 laptop I can test on. > (though > > >> it is > > >> >> > low power) > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Aldrin Piri < > > [email protected]> > > >> >> wrote: > > >> >> > > > >> >> >> I have another set of eyes for NIFI-748. Will do so now. > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Tony Kurc <[email protected]> > > >> wrote: > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > For those not watching commits@nifi > > >> >> >> > I need another set of eyes on the review for NIFI-748 > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 8:33 AM, Joe Witt <[email protected] > > > > >> wrote: > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > NIFI-1082 (this should move to next release unless a > > resolution > > >> is > > >> >> >> > > imminent) > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > NIFI-1108 (move to next release) > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > NIFI-1139 (recommend moving to 0.5.0) > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > NIFI-1164 (this should get fixed now - it makes builds > > >> unreliable) > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > NIFI-1165 (should tackle now. have a windows laptop i can > > build > > >> on) > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > Thanks for pushing tony. > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Tony Kurc < > [email protected]> > > >> >> wrote: > > >> >> >> > > > Update: > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > Presumably fixed by NIFI-1086 (Joe Percivall). Reviewed, > > >> awaiting > > >> >> >> > > revision > > >> >> >> > > > NIFI-61 > > >> >> >> > > > NIFI-812 > > >> >> >> > > > NIFI-980 > > >> >> >> > > > NIFI-1009 > > >> >> >> > > > NIFI-1086 > > >> >> >> > > > NIFI-1133 > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > Multiple Auths (Matt Gilman) no patch yet, making progress > > >> >> >> > > > NIFI-655 > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > Provenance Search Improvement (Oleg Zhurakousky) PR in, > > being > > >> >> >> reviewed > > >> >> >> > by > > >> >> >> > > > Tony Kurc > > >> >> >> > > > NIFI-748 > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > Create a Getting Started Guide (Mark Payne) Review > complete, > > >> being > > >> >> >> > merged > > >> >> >> > > > in by Tony Kurc > > >> >> >> > > > NIFI-973 > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > Line ending fix (Tony Kurc) Finger hovering over "go" > button > > >> >> >> > > > NIFI-1054 > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > ExecuteStreamCommand (Joe Percivall). Reviewed, awaiting > > >> revision > > >> >> >> > > > NIFI-1081 > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > Provenance repository search (Mark Payne) original patch > > >> reverted, > > >> >> >> new > > >> >> >> > > > patch in development? Move to 0.5.0? > > >> >> >> > > > NIFI-1082 > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > Scrub code looking for @InputRequirement consistency (Mark > > >> Payne) > > >> >> - > > >> >> >> not > > >> >> >> > > > sure how to attack this one > > >> >> >> > > > NIFI-1108 > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > * NEW * > > >> >> >> > > > LogAttribute processor fix (Oleg Zhurakousky) - trivial > fix? > > >> but > > >> >> >> > breaking > > >> >> >> > > > change? I recommend moving to 0.5.0 > > >> >> >> > > > NIFI-1139 > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > * NEW * > > >> >> >> > > > Race condition Fix (Oleg Zhurakousky) - assigned but no > > patch. > > >> >> Move > > >> >> >> to > > >> >> >> > > > 0.5.0 or 0.4.1? > > >> >> >> > > > NIFI-1164 > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > * NEW * > > >> >> >> > > > Build on windows failing (Joe Percivall) - assigned but no > > >> patch. > > >> >> I > > >> >> >> can > > >> >> >> > > dig > > >> >> >> > > > in. (I submitted a requst for MSDN, but can take 8 weeks) > > >> >> >> > > > NIFI-1165 > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 10:22 AM, Aldrin Piri < > > >> >> [email protected]> > > >> >> >> > > wrote: > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > >> Scanned through and removed the 0.4.0 tagging for State > > >> >> Management. > > >> >> >> > > >> > > >> >> >> > > >> Thanks for the suggestion. > > >> >> >> > > >> > > >> >> >> > > >> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Sean Busbey < > > >> >> [email protected]> > > >> >> >> > > wrote: > > >> >> >> > > >> > > >> >> >> > > >> > Has anyone had a chance to do a pass through Feature > > >> Proposals > > >> >> to > > >> >> >> > move > > >> >> >> > > >> out > > >> >> >> > > >> > any that aren't going to make 0.4.0? > > >> >> >> > > >> > > > >> >> >> > > >> > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFI/NiFi+Feature+Proposals > > >> >> >> > > >> > > > >> >> >> > > >> > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 8:13 AM, Tony Kurc < > > >> [email protected]> > > >> >> >> > wrote: > > >> >> >> > > >> > > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-61 - > > awaiting > > >> an > > >> >> >> > answer > > >> >> >> > > >> > before > > >> >> >> > > >> > > patch can be completed > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-655 - > > Based on > > >> >> >> feature > > >> >> >> > > >> branch > > >> >> >> > > >> > > activity, is close? > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-696 - > > >> awaiting a > > >> >> >> patch > > >> >> >> > > >> > marking > > >> >> >> > > >> > > method as deprecated (assigned to me, but if someone > > else > > >> >> wants > > >> >> >> to > > >> >> >> > > take > > >> >> >> > > >> > it > > >> >> >> > > >> > > and I review, thats cool too) > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-812 - a > > bit > > >> >> >> confused > > >> >> >> > > about > > >> >> >> > > >> > > this > > >> >> >> > > >> > > one. patch in NIFI-1086 will close this? > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-973 - > > awaiting > > >> >> >> review? > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-980 - > (see > > 812 > > >> >> >> > > confusion) > > >> >> >> > > >> > > presumably closed when NIFI-1086 is closed > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1009 > > (same!) > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1054 I'm > at > > >> the > > >> >> >> ready > > >> >> >> > to > > >> >> >> > > >> > submit > > >> >> >> > > >> > > a patch at the 11th hour. .gitattributes may be a > > >> candidate > > >> >> for > > >> >> >> > > 0.5.0 > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1073 - > some > > >> bug > > >> >> >> fixes > > >> >> >> > > >> > awaiting > > >> >> >> > > >> > > review. if we don't have review bandwidth can be > > pushed to > > >> >> next > > >> >> >> > > release > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1081 - > > >> reviewed, > > >> >> >> > > probably > > >> >> >> > > >> > needs > > >> >> >> > > >> > > revision. Presuming the revisions can be done > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1082 - > > Unclear > > >> >> as to > > >> >> >> > > >> status. > > >> >> >> > > >> > Is > > >> >> >> > > >> > > this awaiting review? > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1086 - > > Seems > > >> like > > >> >> >> this > > >> >> >> > > is > > >> >> >> > > >> the > > >> >> >> > > >> > > lynchpin for several tickets, probably should be a > > >> priority > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1097 - > > >> Awaiting > > >> >> >> > review? > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1108 - > > >> Awaiting > > >> >> >> > comment > > >> >> >> > > >> from > > >> >> >> > > >> > > Mark Payne. > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1109 - > > >> awaiting a > > >> >> >> > merge > > >> >> >> > > to > > >> >> >> > > >> > > master? > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1127 - > > >> awaiting > > >> >> >> > review? > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1132 - > > >> awaiting > > >> >> >> review > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1133 - > > >> awaiting > > >> >> >> review > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1153 - > > >> awaiting > > >> >> >> review > > >> >> >> > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1155 - > > blocker > > >> >> bug > > >> >> >> > > awaiting > > >> >> >> > > >> > > patch > > >> >> >> > > >> > > > > >> >> >> > > >> > > Seems like we're in good shape. I will have some > review > > >> >> >> bandwidth > > >> >> >> > > this > > >> >> >> > > >> > > evening, so if you start reviewing, please note that > in > > >> the > > >> >> >> jiras. > > >> >> >> > > >> > > > > >> >> >> > > >> > > Can we get answers for 1108 and 61 and contemplate a > > slip > > >> to > > >> >> >> > 0.5.0? > > >> >> >> > > >> > > > > >> >> >> > > >> > > Tony > > >> >> >> > > >> > > > > >> >> >> > > >> > > > >> >> >> > > >> > > > >> >> >> > > >> > > > >> >> >> > > >> > -- > > >> >> >> > > >> > Sean > > >> >> >> > > >> > > > >> >> >> > > >> > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > -- > > >> >> > Sean > > >> >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Sean > > >
