[GitHub] apex-core pull request #487: APEXCORE-671 ValueEntry reverted back to public

GitHub user PramodSSImmaneni opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/apex-core/pull/487 APEXCORE-671 ValueEntry reverted back to public @ajaygit158 @vrozov @sandeshh please see. A more permanent solution can be done later but this currently breaks dependencies. You can

[jira] [Commented] (APEXCORE-671) DTConfiguration utility class ValueEntry access level was changed

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXCORE-671?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15930266#comment-15930266 ] ASF GitHub Bot commented on APEXCORE-671: - GitHub user PramodSSImmaneni opened a pull request:

[jira] [Created] (APEXCORE-671) DTConfiguration utility class ValueEntry access level was changed

Pramod Immaneni created APEXCORE-671: Summary: DTConfiguration utility class ValueEntry access level was changed Key: APEXCORE-671 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXCORE-671 Project:

[GitHub] apex-core pull request #487: APEXCORE-671 ValueEntry reverted back to public

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/apex-core/pull/487 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is

[jira] [Assigned] (APEXCORE-671) DTConfiguration utility class ValueEntry access level was changed

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXCORE-671?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Pramod Immaneni reassigned APEXCORE-671: Assignee: Pramod Immaneni > DTConfiguration utility class ValueEntry access

[jira] [Commented] (APEXCORE-671) DTConfiguration utility class ValueEntry access level was changed

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXCORE-671?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15930292#comment-15930292 ] ASF GitHub Bot commented on APEXCORE-671: - Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

[jira] [Commented] (APEXCORE-526) Publish javadoc for releases on ASF infrastructure

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXCORE-526?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15930800#comment-15930800 ] Munagala V. Ramanath commented on APEXCORE-526: --- We now have two functions:

[jira] [Commented] (APEXCORE-526) Publish javadoc for releases on ASF infrastructure

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXCORE-526?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15930353#comment-15930353 ] Munagala V. Ramanath commented on APEXCORE-526: ---

[jira] [Resolved] (APEXCORE-526) Publish javadoc for releases on ASF infrastructure

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXCORE-526?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Munagala V. Ramanath resolved APEXCORE-526. --- Resolution: Fixed The JavaDocs are now available for both Malhar and Core

[jira] [Created] (APEXCORE-672) Automate generate user doc

Thomas Weise created APEXCORE-672: - Summary: Automate generate user doc Key: APEXCORE-672 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXCORE-672 Project: Apache Apex Core Issue Type:

[jira] [Updated] (APEXCORE-672) Automate deployment of user documentation

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXCORE-672?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Thomas Weise updated APEXCORE-672: -- Summary: Automate deployment of user documentation (was: Automate generate user doc) >

[jira] [Commented] (APEXCORE-673) Publish Javadoc for master branches on git push

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXCORE-673?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15931020#comment-15931020 ] Pramod Immaneni commented on APEXCORE-673: -- Would this be to a public or some internal

[jira] [Created] (APEXCORE-673) Publish Javadoc for master branches on git push

Thomas Weise created APEXCORE-673: - Summary: Publish Javadoc for master branches on git push Key: APEXCORE-673 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXCORE-673 Project: Apache Apex Core

[jira] [Updated] (APEXMALHAR-2449) Support for batch demarcation in input/output operators

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXMALHAR-2449?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Bhupesh Chawda updated APEXMALHAR-2449: --- Description: In order to support the demarcation of multiple batches in an

[GitHub] apex-core pull request #486: APEXCORE-662 Raising StramEvent in case of hear...

GitHub user Hitesh-Scorpio opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/apex-core/pull/486 APEXCORE-662 Raising StramEvent in case of heartbeat miss @tushargosavi Please review. I have tested this externally on gateway, attaching screenshot of the same.

[jira] [Commented] (APEXCORE-662) Raise StramEvent for heartbeat miss

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXCORE-662?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15929704#comment-15929704 ] ASF GitHub Bot commented on APEXCORE-662: - GitHub user Hitesh-Scorpio opened a pull request:

[GitHub] apex-malhar pull request #569: APEXMALHAR-2416 Implementation of Redshift ou...

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/apex-malhar/pull/569 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature

[jira] [Resolved] (APEXMALHAR-2416) Development of Redshift Output Module

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APEXMALHAR-2416?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] shubham pathak resolved APEXMALHAR-2416. Resolution: Fixed Fix Version/s: 3.7.0 > Development of Redshift Output

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal for adapting Malhar operators for batch use cases

Yes having this type of window not tied to timestamp will work out better. On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:58 AM, David Yan wrote: > I now see your rationale on putting the filename in the window. > As far as I understand, the reasons why the filename is not part of the key > and