Joe, May I ask what was the decision?
Kind regards On 24 Nov 2016 01:13, "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 > >> >>> > >>>> > >> >>> > >>>> > >> >>> > >>>> > >> >>> > >>>> > >> >>> > >>>> > >> >>> > >>>> > >> >>> > >>>> > >> >>> > >>>> > >> >>> > >>>> > >> >>> > > >> >>> > >> >
