Well I'm certainly willing to not do it! That being said, I don't know that we've had a non-PMC member do the job of RM'ing (I tried to find logs of it all, and failed).
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Joe Skora <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm willing take a try at RM or work with someone to understand it in the > future. > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Tony Kurc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Awesome. I propose we start building a release candidate off of > > 40618364e70a966f9c1e425674b53b22b1fb0fb0 soon. > > > > I believe I was the sole volunteer to RM, and unless I hear otherwise, I > > presume I will be doing so. I'd like to give the commit at least a good > 24 > > hours for some people to bang on it before I start pulling together an > RC. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:30 AM, Michael Moser <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > NIFI-2774 is now complete and merged to both master and 0.x branches. > +1 > > > on a release from the 0.x branch now. > > > > > > -- Mike > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Michael Moser <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I feel that Oleg was really close, and it would be nice for this to > be > > in > > > > 0.7.1 but it isn't necessary. I did functional testing on the current > > > state > > > > of the PR and I am +1 in that respect. > > > > > > > > -- Mike > > > > > > > > On Oct 10, 2016 9:40 AM, "Tony Kurc" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > >> So in reviewing the Jiras, it looks like the two tickets NIFI-2429, > > > >> NIFI-2874 were merged in and NIFI-2774 is still under discussion. > > Oleg, > > > >> Mike, are we feeling like we're close, or would this best fit in the > > > next > > > >> 0.x release? > > > >> > > > >> Tony > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Michael Moser <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > Thanks Joe Witt, I reviewed that PR and got it into 0.x. > > > >> > > > > >> > Since we decided that our next 0.x release will be 0.7.1, I am > going > > > >> > through JIRA and for all Resolved tickets marked against 0.8.0 I > am > > > >> > changing their Fix Version to 0.7.1. Open tickets I will not > > change. > > > >> > > > > >> > -- Mike > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > Team, > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Mark Payne just opened this one: https://issues.apache.org/ > > > >> > > jira/browse/NIFI-2874 > > > >> > > > > > >> > > It should probably be in this release if able. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Thanks > > > >> > > Joe > > > >> > > > > > >> > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Michael Moser < > > [email protected]> > > > >> > wrote: > > > >> > > > I am reviewing the PR for NIFI-2774 ConsumeJMS and we need > > someone > > > >> to > > > >> > > > review the PR for NIFI-2429 PersistentProvenanceRepository. > > Once > > > >> > those > > > >> > > are > > > >> > > > complete I think we can start the process to cut 0.7.1. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > -- Mike > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 9:49 AM, Tony Kurc <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > >> So, sounds like we have enough support to go ahead. How are > we > > > >> feeling > > > >> > > >> about what our timeline should be on this? > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 11:14 PM, Joe Witt < > [email protected] > > > > > > >> > wrote: > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > +1 to an 0.7.1 with the bugs that have been addressed > > already. > > > >> > > >> > Even bigger +1 to Tony volunteering as RM! > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > Thanks > > > >> > > >> > Joe > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 10:24 PM, Brandon DeVries < > > [email protected] > > > > > > > >> > > wrote: > > > >> > > >> > > I agree sooner rather than later for cutting 0.7.1. I > think > > > >> Mike's > > > >> > > >> > question > > > >> > > >> > > to some degree was whether or not some of those tickets > > were > > > >> worth > > > >> > > >> fixing > > > >> > > >> > > in 0.x. For example, I'm not sure how much I care about: > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > NIFI-2571 deprecate NiFiProperties.getInstance() > > > >> > > >> > > NIFI-2163 nifi.sh follow the Linux service spec > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > On the other, there are some I would like to see, even if > > its > > > >> in > > > >> > > 0.7.2 > > > >> > > >> or > > > >> > > >> > > 0.8.0, e.g.: > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > NIFI-2433 "Primary Node Only" processors > > > >> > > >> > > NIFI-2562 PutHDFS data corruption > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > But, there are a number of things that are currently > > > committed > > > >> (or > > > >> > > have > > > >> > > >> > > patch available) that I'd like to see available as soon > as > > > >> > > possible. So > > > >> > > >> > > rather than wait for more "nice to haves", I'd rather > > address > > > >> the > > > >> > > >> > immediate > > > >> > > >> > > needs... Immediately. > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > Brandon > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 10:15 PM Tony Kurc < > > [email protected] > > > > > > > >> > > wrote: > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> I think I brought this up before, I sort of expected we > > may > > > do > > > >> > more > > > >> > > >> 0.x > > > >> > > >> > >> releases. I certainly think the more the bugs we can > fix, > > > the > > > >> > > merrier, > > > >> > > >> > and > > > >> > > >> > >> it seems like your list is a good initial strawman for a > > bug > > > >> fix > > > >> > > >> > release of > > > >> > > >> > >> we collectively would like to put one together. > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> While the tickets with work to do on them would be great > > to > > > >> have > > > >> > > >> fixed, > > > >> > > >> > I > > > >> > > >> > >> personally would rather see a release with some fixes > and > > a > > > >> > couple > > > >> > > >> known > > > >> > > >> > >> issues than holding off for "perfection", especially as > a > > > lot > > > >> of > > > >> > > our > > > >> > > >> > effort > > > >> > > >> > >> is on 1.x. Are you asking if effort would be wasted if > > > patches > > > >> > were > > > >> > > >> > >> developed for the 0.x issues? > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> Fwiw, I certainly could do the RM work if there is > > > >> > interest/demand > > > >> > > >> > signal > > > >> > > >> > >> for in another 0.x. > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> On Sep 27, 2016 5:28 PM, "Michael Moser" < > > > [email protected]> > > > >> > > wrote: > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > All, > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >> > I would like to start the discussion of making the > next > > > >> > official > > > >> > > >> > release > > > >> > > >> > >> of > > > >> > > >> > >> > the 0.x branch. I propose that this release be > numbered > > > >> 0.7.1 > > > >> > > since > > > >> > > >> > it > > > >> > > >> > >> > seems that only bug fixes have occurred on the 0.x > > branch > > > >> since > > > >> > > >> 0.7.0 > > > >> > > >> > was > > > >> > > >> > >> > released. > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >> > The JIRA link [1] below can show you the tickets that > > have > > > >> been > > > >> > > >> > completed > > > >> > > >> > >> > in the 0.x branch. There are 33 tickets in this list > > that > > > >> are > > > >> > > >> > resolved. > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >> > Here is a list of JIRA tickets that are not yet > complete > > > >> that > > > >> > we > > > >> > > >> need > > > >> > > >> > to > > > >> > > >> > >> > decide what to do with. > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >> > Patch Available > > > >> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2429 PersistentProvenanceRepository > > > >> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2774 ConsumeJMS > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >> > Open against 0.7.0 > > > >> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2383 ListFiles > > > >> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2433 "Primary Node Only" processors (fixed in > > master > > > >> but > > > >> > > this > > > >> > > >> > ticket > > > >> > > >> > >> > is for 0.x) > > > >> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2798 Zookeeper security upgrade > > > >> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2801 Kafka processors documentation > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >> > Other high priority bugs not yet specifically targeted > > to > > > >> the > > > >> > 0.x > > > >> > > >> > branch, > > > >> > > >> > >> > should we try to work these? > > > >> > > >> > >> > NIFI-1696 Event Driven processors > > > >> > > >> > >> > NIFI-1912 PutEmail content-type > > > >> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2163 nifi.sh follow the Linux service spec > > > >> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2409 StoreKiteInDataset invalid URI > > > >> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2562 PutHDFS data corruption > > > >> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2571 deprecate NiFiProperties.getInstance() > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >> > -- Mike > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >> > [1] - > > > >> > > >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-2801?jql= > > > >> > > >> > >> > project%20%3D%20NIFI%20AND% > > 20fixVersion%20in%20%280.7.1% > > > >> > > >> 2C%200.8.0%29 > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
