Re: [VOTE] Update dev guidelines with format for sharing architecture source files and rendered images

2019-05-03 Thread Michael Miklavcic
Good idea - I will make that addendum. I would consider that, ipso facto, acceptable to everyone on the thread unless they say otherwise - considering the entire point of this vote is to standardize the diagram tool, it would be inconsistent with that goal to use the word "should." "Must" makes

Re: [VOTE] Update dev guidelines with format for sharing architecture source files and rendered images

2019-05-03 Thread zeo...@gmail.com
+1 non-binding I would only prefer that we change "Appropriate architecture diagrams should be created in" to "Appropriate architecture diagrams must be created in" but I'm good either way. - Jon Zeolla zeo...@gmail.com On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 10:18 AM Michael Miklavcic <

Re: [DISCUSS] Full-dev role in PR testign

2019-05-03 Thread Michael Miklavcic
That's awesome, Nick! Looking forward to seeing how this works out. On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 10:06 AM Nick Allen wrote: > I'm exploring the use of TestContainers right now as part of the HDP 3.1 > effort. Still exploring feasibility, but it is looking promising. > > On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 10:46

Re: [DISCUSS] Full-dev role in PR testign

2019-05-03 Thread Nick Allen
I'm exploring the use of TestContainers right now as part of the HDP 3.1 effort. Still exploring feasibility, but it is looking promising. On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 10:46 AM Justin Leet wrote: > I think everything Casey mentioned is a good call-out as things start to > build into specifics. I

Re: [DISCUSS] Full-dev role in PR testign

2019-05-03 Thread Justin Leet
I think everything Casey mentioned is a good call-out as things start to build into specifics. I definitely agree it's a very nontrivial amount of work, but that lowering the barrier of entry to a lot of PRs eases the burden on both new and existing contributors by a substantial amount. @Mike, As

Re: [VOTE] Update dev guidelines with format for sharing architecture source files and rendered images

2019-05-03 Thread Michael Miklavcic
Yes, it is free James. We made sure of that in the original discussion. On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 9:33 PM James Sirota wrote: > i am ok with it as long as we are not forcing people to buy stuff > > 02.05.2019, 18:18, "Michael Miklavcic" : > > Here's the latest discussion on the subject: > > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Full-dev role in PR testign

2019-05-03 Thread Michael Miklavcic
I didn't get a chance to say so earlier, but Justin, I also like the JUnit 5 extension suggestion. I've gone through some en-masse changes before, e.g. standardizing the log4j construction idiom, and it honestly wasn't too bad. Just a thought, it might make sense to kick this off by upgrading

Re: [DISCUSS] Full-dev role in PR testign

2019-05-03 Thread Casey Stella
I just want to chime in and say I'm STRONGLY in favor of a docker-based approach to testing (I specifically like the JUnit 5 extensions suggestion). I think that forcing a full-dev evaluation for every small PR is a barrier to entry that I'd like to overcome. I also think that this is going to

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release - 0.7.1 next steps

2019-05-03 Thread Otto Fowler
Despite the name, we *have* been using it as both for quite some amount of time. It *is* both dev and demo, and we recommend it as such on the list all the time. So there isn’t a decision to be made here as far as the status quo -> we use full dev as both dev and demo. On May 2, 2019 at

Re: [VOTE] Update dev guidelines with format for sharing architecture source files and rendered images

2019-05-03 Thread Otto Fowler
+1 On May 2, 2019 at 21:18:21, Michael Miklavcic (michael.miklav...@gmail.com) wrote: Here's the latest discussion on the subject: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/0aa2b0b9ed4a0f0b0d8bb018c618e62de196565f9af71f347e504076@%3Cdev.metron.apache.org%3E I'd like to propose a vote to change our

Re: [DISCUSS] Parser Aggregation in Management UI

2019-05-03 Thread Shane Ardell
NgRx was only used for the aggregation feature and doesn't go beyond that. I think the way I worded that sentence may have caused confusion. I just meant we use it to manage more pieces of state within the aggregation feature than just previous and current state of grouped parsers. On Fri, May 3,