release notes here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFI/Release+Notes#ReleaseNotes-Version1.1.0
migration notes here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFI/Migration+Guidance Will kick out an RC today or in next day or two hopefully. Thanks Joe On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > Some good news - we can put our twitter processor back in the game. > > Legal VP at Apache just sent out the decision. > > Will immediately restore that to action and put in the follow-on > ticket to ensure the twitter4j library moves away from the old Json > lib (there is a PR to replace it). We can only keep it this way until > April so unless twitter4j resolves their source dependency we'll be > back in this position. > > thanks > joe > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Michael Moser <moser...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Awesome. Your prompt and detailed feedback is very much appreciated! >> >> >> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 12:47 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> mike - also to clarify based on what you brought up I updated the JIRA >>> description as follows >>> >>> The following also would be true: >>> 1) Apache NiFi 1.0.0 repositories should work just fine when applied >>> to an Apache NiFi 1.1.0 installation. >>> >>> 2) Repositories made/updated in Apache NiFi 1.1.0 onward would not >>> work in older Apache NiFi releases (such as 1.0.0) >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > Mike - yeah good catch and good question. It does support the old >>> > format. We've always been pretty good about being diligent to allow >>> > folks to upgrade and it honor existing state and in many cases >>> > configurations and it would automatically port them over. What has >>> > always been far more problematic is 'rollback' where people ran on >>> > newer configurations but could not then go back to old framework code. >>> > That is what NIFI-2854 tackles at least as far as the >>> > content/prov/flowfile repositories go. Now, the code and >>> > serialization is done in such a way that older version can simply >>> > ignore what never versions encoded if they don't understand it but >>> > they should be able to continue on. >>> > >>> > I just tried out a 1.0.0 flow with data queued up. Upgraded to a >>> > latest NiFi 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT. Moved the repos over. And it came up >>> > perfectly with all the queue data ready to roll. >>> > >>> > Thanks >>> > Joe >>> > >>> > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Michael Moser <moser...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >> After seeing "Repositories now support rollback" in the release notes >>> and >>> >> reading NIFI-2854 [1], I have a question. >>> >> >>> >> Are repositories created using NiFi 1.0.0 compatible with NiFi 1.1.0 >>> >> software? This is the goal that the ticket seems to indicate with 1.1.0 >>> >> onward, but it's not clear whether 1.0.0 -> 1.1.0 is included. >>> >> >>> >> Thanks, >>> >> -- Mike >>> >> >>> >> [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-2854 >>> >> >>> >> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 12:08 PM, James Wing <jvw...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> 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 cc5e827aa1dfe2f376e9836380ba63 >>> c15269eea8). >>> >>> > >>>> >>> >>> > >>>> 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 >>> >>> > >>>> >>> >>> > >>>> >>> >>> > >>>> >>> >>> > >>>> >>> >>> > >>>> >>> >>> > >>>> >>> >>> > >>>> >>> >>> > >>>> >>> >>> > >>>> >>> >>> > >>> >>> >>>
