Going through the tickets, it seems like quite a release.  A few more
things for your list:

GenerateFlowFile updated to support literal/expression content and
attributes

AWS-related:
* New processors PutCloudWatchMetric, PutKinesisStream
* Updated processors PutS3Object (content type, signer options), ListS3
(performance, versions)
* Added support for AWS assume role credentials with proxy


Thanks,

James

On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote:

> matt
>
> i'll add a wiki page or set of instructions linked from the release notes.
>
> all,
>
> walked through the 250 or so JIRAs in the 1.1.0 release and pulled out
> highlights.  The items noted are as follows.  Will likely reduce this
> down further for the release notes but wanted to put this out in case
> folks have things they think are really important to highlight.
>
> - Core Improvements:
>    - Performance: Session Migration
>    - Stability: Cluster Management
>    - Developer: Framework supports easy user driven classloader extension
>    - Expression Language: Now supports base64 and hex encoded values
> and Math functions
>    - Repositories now support rollback
>    - Faster startup due to more efficient state restoration algorithm
> - UX Improvements:
>    - Visual Backpressure Indicator
>    - Introduced more colors to better highlight actions and components
>    - Performance: Validate non-running components
>    - Provenance graph image can be exported
>    - Cron Scheduling for Primary node tasks now supported
> - Updated versions
>    - Azure Event Hub 0.9.0
>    - Spark 2.0.1
>    - Hadoop 2.7.x
> - New/Improved Processors
>    - new Fetch/Put Elastic Search 5.0
>    - new ParseCEF to parse CEF formatted logs
>    - improve ExtractEmail now supports TNEF files
>    - new Validate CSV
>    - improved Solr processors now support SSL and Kerberos
>    - new Websocket client and server processors
> - New Utility
>    - Zookeeper Migrator (move from one zookeeper to another)
> - Security
>    - Restricted Processors
>    - Site-to-site now supports port forwarding
>    - Improved Policy Management UX
> - Migration Notes:
>    - Restricted Processors
>    - Twitter Processor Removed
>
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 10:17 PM, Matt Burgess <mattyb...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > Is there a good spot for us to put instructions on how to build the
> > Twitter processor and/or the Social Media NAR in the meantime? Maybe a
> > Wiki page or something simple to say "go to this directory, run this
> > Maven command, drop the NAR into your deployment..." ?
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Team,
> >>
> >> We appear to be very close.  Andy is working NIFI-3024 but otherwise
> >> it is focus on testing.
> >>
> >> I'm going to prep the RC and release notes now.  Unfortunately the
> >> twitter changes for json.org will need to remain.  Consensus forming
> >> on the legal-discuss thread regarding a grace period has been elusive
> >> and we're already prepared to make the right steps so we'll just need
> >> to take that on by being empathetic to the user base.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Joe
> >>
> >> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Andre <andre-li...@fucs.org> wrote:
> >>> Andy,
> >>>
> >>> Great to see NIFI-3050 implemented and certainly good news that NiFi
> 1.1.0
> >>> is set to include a number of security related improvements.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Andy LoPresto <alopre...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Just updating this thread that NIFI-3050 [1] and NIFI-3051 [2] have
> been
> >>>> added to my plate for this release. Coordinated with Joe Witt and they
> >>>> should both be included.
> >>>>
> >>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-3050
> >>>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-3051
> >>>>
> >>>> 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 16, 2016, at 12:08 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> 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
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
>

Reply via email to