Andy is correct, I should have been more specific in referring to MiNiFi strictly as "MiNiFi Java" for this discussion. MiNiFi C++ would remain its own repo with its own build processes, release cadence, etc.
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 3:59 PM Andy LoPresto <[email protected]> wrote: > > Jeff, my understanding is that MiNiFi C++ development will continue > unaffected by this. While the release process may shift slightly as MiNiFi > Java and NiFi are combined, I actually think this will improve both processes > and shouldn’t negatively influence the capability to release either in a > useable format. > > Andy LoPresto > [email protected] > [email protected] > He/Him > PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > > > On May 21, 2020, at 12:22 PM, Jeff Zemerick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Apologies if this has been discussed previously. I've not kept up on the > > Mi/NiFi progress as much lately. > > > > When I think of two projects being combined I usually consider the > > connection between the lifecycles of the two projects. One thing I always > > liked about MiNiFi being separate was its ability to evolve outside the > > NiFi lifecycle. New features, enhancements, and fixes could be released as > > needed. It also had its own voting process for releases. But it certainly > > had its drawbacks, too. > > > > With the two projects being combined, is there any fear of negative effects > > to MiNiFi's development being tied to NiFi's release cadence? Will it be > > possible to do a MiNiFi release outside of a NiFi release? Or any desire to? > > > > I'm not at all proposing not to merge the projects because there's a lot to > > gain as stated in the initial email, but I would like to see MiNiFi be able > > to maintain some of that independence and flexibility, if possible. > > > > Thanks, > > Jeff > > > > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 1:54 PM Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Yes please! > >> > >> On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 1:53 PM Andy LoPresto <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Matt, > >>> > >>> I think this is a great idea, and I think it could also provide a bridge > >>> to the reduced kernel build of NiFi with separate extensions that the > >>> extensions registry will ultimately offer. Once the MiNiFi and NiFi > >>> assemblies are complete, it should be possible to add a third which does > >>> include the UI/API, but does not include the majority of specialized > >>> processor NARs, etc. > >>> > >>> Andy LoPresto > >>> [email protected] > >>> [email protected] > >>> He/Him > >>> PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > >>> > >>>> On May 21, 2020, at 10:49 AM, Pierre Villard < > >>> [email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Nothing useful to add other than I know this is going to be a lot of > >>> work, > >>>> but this is GREAT! > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Pierre > >>>> > >>>> Le jeu. 21 mai 2020 à 19:44, Matt Burgess <[email protected]> a > >>> écrit : > >>>> > >>>>> All, > >>>>> > >>>>> I'm currently working on MINIFI-422, which aims to bring the MiNiFi > >>>>> code into the NiFi codebase and have the MiNiFi product be a > >>>>> specialized assembly of NiFi. Picture two different Maven profiles > >>>>> that create a NiFi assembly or a MiNiFi assembly, each including the > >>>>> common elements but excluding those things that aren't needed, such as > >>>>> MiNiFi being "headless" and not including Jetty or the UI. > >>>>> > >>>>> This will be a lot of effort and very invasive to NiFi itself, so I > >>>>> created a MINIFI-422 branch (based on the current master) and pushed > >>>>> that to the Apache NiFi Github repo. I figure that way we can carve > >>>>> out individual tasks and write PRs against that branch, rather than > >>>>> duplicating code in the meantime and having MiNiFi show up little by > >>>>> little in the NiFi codebase. > >>>>> > >>>>> My first task to that end is to continue Aldrin's work on MINIFI-488. > >>>>> I originally had a PR against master for this subtask, but after > >>>>> discussing with Aldrin we thought it would be better to have a > >>>>> separate branch and incrementally add MiNiFi functionality until we're > >>>>> ready for a big PR to bring it all into NiFi. > >>>>> > >>>>> We still want to keep up with NiFi master, so the branch would be > >>>>> subject to force-pushes, rebases, etc. For that reason I'd like to ask > >>>>> that anyone working on that branch please reach out to me > >>>>> ([email protected]) so we can coordinate and collaborate, to > >> ensure > >>>>> we're not stepping on each other's toes :) > >>>>> > >>>>> Also happy to discuss alternate approaches or any other questions or > >>>>> concerns you may have. > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards, > >>>>> Matt > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >> >
