Team There is a thread on apache legal-discuss that might allow for a graceperiod of continued usage of the json library. Am going to keep a close eye on this and if VP Legal approves we'll be able to keep the twitter processors in which is definitely a good thing. Will advise
Thanks Joe On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Bryan Bende <bbe...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've noticed an issue with the per-instance class loading capability > introduced in NIFI-2909 where the additional classpath resources can get > incorrectly removed from the class loader. > > I was able to reproduced this with a unit test and have a fix ready. I > believe this is important and needs to go in for the 1.1 release, going to > re-open NIFI-2909 and submit a PR shortly. > > -Bryan > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:11 AM, Matt Gilman <matt.c.gil...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I have two items that I would like to wrap up prior to creating an RC for >> 1.1.0. NIFI-2949 addresses some UX issues around Remote Process Group port >> configuration. The work is already completed and I will be reviewing it >> this today. Additionally, following recent interest on the mailing list, >> I'd like to knock out NIFI-3020. This will allow an admin to configure a >> strategy for user identity when logging in via LDAP. Specifically, it will >> support usage of the DN (the default and current implementation) as well as >> the username the user logged in as. I should be able to have a PR up for >> this work later today. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Matt >> >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-2949 >> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-3020 >> >> >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 8:00 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > The code is within the twitter4j library itself. I filed a request to >> > twitter4jg. The most likely case is we will need to submit a PR to them. >> > However, I don't see this as something that should delay the release. We >> > can provide instructions for folks wanting to use the processor during >> the >> > time we cannot make it available in a convenient manner. I will provide >> a >> > meaningful comment about this in release notes and pointers on what folks >> > can do in the meantime. >> > >> > On Nov 15, 2016 7:41 PM, "Andy LoPresto" <alopre...@apache.org> wrote: >> > >> > > I understand there was a discussion thread within the NiFi community >> for >> > > this as well and I missed responding to that at that time. It just >> seems >> > to >> > > me like JSON processing is necessary for GetTwitter, which is >> incredibly >> > > useful for demonstrating NiFi’s ability to read from a high volume >> stream >> > > out of the box. With NIFI-3019 (Remove GetTwitter from default build), >> is >> > > there any related effort to substitute an acceptable replacement JSON >> > > library to restore this functionality? >> > > >> > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-3019 >> > > >> > > Andy LoPresto >> > > alopre...@apache.org >> > > *alopresto.apa...@gmail.com <alopresto.apa...@gmail.com>* >> > > PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 >> > > >> > > On Nov 15, 2016, at 4:36 PM, Andy LoPresto <alopre...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> > > >> > > I’m working with Bryan Rosander to close out NIFI-3024, NIFI-2655, and >> > > NIFI-2653. I believe Matt Burgess is working on NIFI-3011 and we >> > > investigated some alternate TLS config options for the new version of >> the >> > > client library. >> > > >> > > Is there any alternative to excluding the GetTwitter processor? Using >> > > Johnzon [1] or the Android re-implementation [2] discussed in the >> mailing >> > > list thread? >> > > >> > > [1] https://johnzon.apache.org/ >> > > [2] https://developer.android.com/reference/org/json/package- >> > summary.html >> > > >> > > >> > > Andy LoPresto >> > > alopre...@apache.org >> > > *alopresto.apa...@gmail.com <alopresto.apa...@gmail.com>* >> > > PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 >> > > >> > > On Nov 15, 2016, at 3:58 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > Team >> > > >> > > Very happy to see that we are down to three items remaining tagged to >> > > 1.1.0. Solid effort over the recent weeks to close the gap including >> > work >> > > to get past the now category x Jason dependency we had. The most >> notable >> > > impact from that is the wildly popular GetTwitter processor, the fav >> new >> > > nifi user and demo processor, can no longer be included in the default >> > > build. It is optionally available if users choose to build and use it >> > but >> > > we won't distribute binaries that have it. >> > > >> > > I see some review movement on some patch available but untagged items. >> > > >> > > I plan to kick off the 1.1.0 rc work soon. Perhaps Thurs or Fri. Anyone >> > > have any outstanding items? >> > > >> > > Thanks >> > > Joe >> > > >> > > On Nov 8, 2016 2:12 PM, "Joe Witt" <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > Ryan >> > > >> > > Not officially but I think we should try to close this thing out and >> > > start a vote in the next week or two at most. >> > > >> > > I'm going through the tickets again now. There is also a new issue of >> > > the json-p license falling out of favor in Apache legal terms and >> > > becoming Category-X. Am looking into that now. >> > > >> > > Thanks >> > > Joe >> > > >> > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Ryan Ward <ryan.wa...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > > >> > > Joe - Is there a target date for 1.1? >> > > >> > > On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > Team, >> > > >> > > Just an update on things with working toward an Apache NiFi 1.1.0 >> > > release. There are still about 33 JIRAs there now and some are >> > > awaiting review and are some are under active progress. Yet there is >> > > good traction and progress. I think we should just stay vigilant with >> > > what makes it in and keep working it down. So let's please shoot for >> > > a couple weeks from now. If it is ready sooner I'll jump on it. >> > > >> > > Thanks >> > > Joe >> > > >> > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > Team, >> > > >> > > There are 31 open JIRAs at present tagged to Apache NiFi 1.1.0. Let's >> > > avoiding putting more in there for now at least without a discussion. >> > > Of the 31 JIRAs there the vast majority need review so we should be >> > > able to close these down fairly quickly as long as we don't let the >> > > list grow. >> > > >> > > Thanks >> > > joe >> > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Edgardo Vega <edgardo.v...@gmail.com> >> > > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > Joe, >> > > >> > > Appreciate the offer it isn't my PR. I was just using it as an >> > > >> > > example. >> > > >> > > All >> > > >> > > mine are currently closed, which I greatly appreciate. >> > > >> > > Cheers, >> > > >> > > Edgardo >> > > >> > > On Friday, October 14, 2016, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > Edgardo, >> > > >> > > You mentioned a PR from August. I'd be happy to help you work that >> > > through review. >> > > >> > > Thanks >> > > Joe >> > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Edgardo Vega < >> > > >> > > edgardo.v...@gmail.com >> > > >> > > <javascript:;>> wrote: >> > > >> > > I have agreed that at this point a release is important. My goal >> > > >> > > was >> > > >> > > try >> > > >> > > to >> > > >> > > squeeze in a much goodness as possible into the release, but the >> > > >> > > important >> > > >> > > bug fixes should come first. Getting 1.x into a state where the >> > > >> > > release >> > > >> > > notes don't say that it is geared toward developers and testers is >> > > >> > > really >> > > >> > > huge. >> > > >> > > I think Nifi is a great community otherwise I would participate in >> > > >> > > the >> > > >> > > mailing list, create Jira tickets and pull requests. I am only >> > > >> > > trying to >> > > >> > > strengthen the great thing that is going on here. We can always do >> > > >> > > better. >> > > >> > > I was not trying to put down this community only to participate and >> > > >> > > make >> > > >> > > it >> > > >> > > better. I think this conversation is an indication of how great >> > > >> > > this >> > > >> > > community is. >> > > >> > > Maybe I am being sensitive about this issue and trying to >> > > >> > > strengthen >> > > >> > > the >> > > >> > > nifi community even more, after coming from a conference where it >> > > >> > > was >> > > >> > > reported there was lots of excitement at first and now the >> > > >> > > participation >> > > >> > > in >> > > >> > > the community has really died down and they are struggling. I don't >> > > >> > > want >> > > >> > > to >> > > >> > > see that happen here. >> > > >> > > Cheers, >> > > >> > > Edgardo >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:37 AM, Andre <andre-li...@fucs.org >> > > >> > > <javascript:;>> wrote: >> > > >> > > >> > > Edgardo, >> > > >> > > Thank you for your feedback. We hear your comments and as a >> > > >> > > committer I >> > > >> > > can >> > > >> > > share we are constantly looking to improve the PR process, having >> > > >> > > already >> > > >> > > taken many of the steps you suggest. >> > > >> > > However, it is important to notice that the number of PRs should >> > > >> > > not be >> > > >> > > seen as a metric of engagement by the development community: Most >> > > >> > > of us >> > > >> > > will submit PRs so that our work can be carefully reviewed by our >> > > >> > > peers >> > > >> > > and >> > > >> > > some of us will use JIRA patches to provide contributions. >> > > >> > > Having said that, it is true that some PRs may sit idle for a long >> > > >> > > time >> > > >> > > and >> > > >> > > we are working to improve this pipeline. >> > > >> > > It was therefore no coincidence that I browsed most of the PRs >> > > >> > > performing >> > > >> > > a triage of items that have been superseded or diverged from the >> > > >> > > current >> > > >> > > code base. >> > > >> > > In fact, less than a month ago the dev team closed a number of >> > > >> > > stalled >> > > >> > > and >> > > >> > > superseded PRs (commit cc5e827aa1dfe2f376e9836380ba63c15269eea8). >> > > >> > > Despite all the above, I think Joe has a point. The master >> > > >> > > contain a >> > > >> > > series >> > > >> > > of important bug fixes and suspect the community would benefit >> > > >> > > from >> > > >> > > a >> > > >> > > release sooner rather than later. >> > > >> > > Once again, thank you for your feedback and contribution. It is >> > > >> > > good to >> > > >> > > have you here. >> > > >> > > Andre >> > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Edgardo Vega < >> > > >> > > edgardo.v...@gmail.com >> > > >> > > <javascript:;>> >> > > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > Joe - You are correct I was mentioning the PRs that are >> > > >> > > currently >> > > >> > > open. >> > > >> > > >> > > Regardless of how it happens reducing the count of open PRs I >> > > >> > > believe >> > > >> > > to >> > > >> > > be >> > > >> > > extremely important. Maybe I was hoping that the release could >> > > >> > > be >> > > >> > > a >> > > >> > > forcing >> > > >> > > function to make that happen. I believe that developers are more >> > > >> > > willing >> > > >> > > to >> > > >> > > contribute when they see that their PRs will actually be able >> > > >> > > accepted >> > > >> > > and >> > > >> > > merged into the code base. Having a low number of open PRs in >> > > >> > > progress >> > > >> > > is a >> > > >> > > great indication that the main nifi developers are fully engaged >> > > >> > > with >> > > >> > > the >> > > >> > > community. >> > > >> > > There are a few PRs that don't have any comments from committers >> > > >> > > at >> > > >> > > all. >> > > >> > > I >> > > >> > > found one from August in that state. If that was my PR I don't >> > > >> > > think I >> > > >> > > would be so willing to put another one in anytime soon. I do get >> > > >> > > that >> > > >> > > sometime PRs get stalled by the originator, if so maybe a rule >> > > >> > > about >> > > >> > > closing them after a certain amount of time or being taken over >> > > >> > > by a >> > > >> > > core >> > > >> > > contributor if they think it worthwhile. >> > > >> > > I would like to shoutout to James Wing on my last PR he was >> > > >> > > quick >> > > >> > > to >> > > >> > > review, provided great comments, testing, and even some >> > > >> > > additional >> > > >> > > code. >> > > >> > > It >> > > >> > > was a great PR experience. >> > > >> > > Cheers, >> > > >> > > Edgardo >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Joe Percivall < >> > > >> > > joeperciv...@yahoo.com <javascript:;>. >> > > >> > > invalid> wrote: >> > > >> > > Joe, I think you misread. Edgardo is referring to the Pull >> > > >> > > Requests >> > > >> > > that >> > > >> > > are currently open, not the tickets assigned to the 1.1.0 >> > > >> > > version. >> > > >> > > >> > > I think these goals (releasing 1.1.0 and cutting down the PR >> > > >> > > count) >> > > >> > > should >> > > >> > > be two different efforts. Doing a thorough job reviewing >> > > >> > > takes a >> > > >> > > significant amount of time from both the reviewer and >> > > >> > > contributor. >> > > >> > > In >> > > >> > > order >> > > >> > > to cut it down significantly would take much longer than a >> > > >> > > couple >> > > >> > > days. >> > > >> > > >> > > Also there has already been a lot of great new features and >> > > >> > > bug >> > > >> > > fixes >> > > >> > > contributed to the 1.X line and I don't think it's worth >> > > >> > > holding up >> > > >> > > a >> > > >> > > 1.1.0 >> > > >> > > release for tickets not assigned to this fix version. As an >> > > >> > > added >> > > >> > > bonus >> > > >> > > though, I think many of the tickets tagged as 1.1.0 have PRs >> > > >> > > already >> > > >> > > open >> > > >> > > so closing those will make a large dent in the PR count. >> > > >> > > >> > > Joe >> > > >> > > - - - - - - >> > > Joseph Percivall >> > > linkedin.com/in/Percivall >> > > e: joeperciv...@yahoo.com <javascript:;> >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thursday, October 13, 2016 3:58 PM, Joe Witt < >> > > >> > > joe.w...@gmail.com >> > > >> > > <javascript:;>> >> > > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > There are less than 30 right now. Many of the roughly 90+ >> > > >> > > JIRAs >> > > >> > > opened on 1.1.0 were easily dispositioned to 1.2.0 or closed >> > > >> > > or >> > > >> > > just >> > > >> > > had fix versions removed. >> > > >> > > We will need to have a push over the next bunch of days to >> > > >> > > deal >> > > >> > > with >> > > >> > > reviewing/merging/moving the remaining items. >> > > >> > > Thanks >> > > Joe >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Edgardo Vega < >> > > >> > > edgardo.v...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> >> > > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > Joe, >> > > >> > > There are 75 PRs currently open. Why not make a push over >> > > >> > > the >> > > >> > > next >> > > >> > > bunch >> > > >> > > of >> > > >> > > days to get them closed and then cut the release after that. >> > > >> > > Cheers, >> > > >> > > Edgardo >> > > >> > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Joe Witt < >> > > >> > > joe.w...@gmail.com >> > > >> > > <javascript:;>> >> > > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > >> > > Team, >> > > >> > > There have been a ton of bugs fixed a few nice features. I >> > > >> > > would >> > > >> > > like >> > > >> > > to move to get Apache NiFi 1.1.0 release going pretty much >> > > >> > > based >> > > >> > > on >> > > >> > > where we are now and plan to move most tickets to a new >> > > >> > > Apache >> > > >> > > NiFi >> > > >> > > 1.2.0 version. We can try to get back on our roughly 6-8 >> > > >> > > week >> > > >> > > release >> > > >> > > schedule and shoot for a mid to late Nov release for NiFi >> > > >> > > 1.2.0 >> > > >> > > this >> > > >> > > way as well. Please advise if anyone has any other views on >> > > >> > > this. In >> > > >> > > the mean time I'll get the wheels in motion so you'll be >> > > >> > > seeing a >> > > >> > > lot >> > > >> > > of JIRA/issue updates to move version around. >> > > >> > > Thanks >> > > Joe >> > > >> > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Tony Kurc < >> > > >> > > trk...@gmail.com >> > > >> > > <javascript:;>> >> > > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > Sounds good Joe. I have no issue to you doing the rm'ing >> > > >> > > for >> > > >> > > it. >> > > >> > > >> > > On Oct 13, 2016 8:19 AM, "Joe Witt" <joe.w...@gmail.com >> > > >> > > <javascript:;>> wrote: >> > > >> > > >> > > Team, >> > > >> > > There are a lot of great fixes and improvements on the >> > > >> > > master >> > > >> > > line >> > > >> > > now >> > > >> > > and we're at a good time window to start pushing for a >> > > >> > > release. >> > > >> > > There >> > > >> > > are, however, about 90+ JIRAs assigned to 1.1.0 which >> > > >> > > are >> > > >> > > open. >> > > >> > > I'm >> > > >> > > going to go through them and remove fix versions where >> > > >> > > appropriate. >> > > >> > > >> > > I'm happy to take on RM task for this release though if >> > > >> > > someone >> > > >> > > else >> > > >> > > would like to take that on please advise. >> > > >> > > Thanks >> > > Joe >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Cheers, >> > > >> > > Edgardo >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Cheers, >> > > >> > > Edgardo >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Cheers, >> > > >> > > Edgardo >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Cheers, >> > > >> > > Edgardo >> > > >> > > Sent from Gmail Mobile >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >>
