[GitHub] nifi pull request: NIFI-923: Upgrade to Spring 4.2.1.RELEASE

Github user mcgilman commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/82#issuecomment-172551960 Sorry this PR has lingered this long. It looks like the current release of Spring is 4.2.4.RELEASE. Would you be able to update your branch to reflect this version?

[GitHub] nifi pull request: NIFI-1406 Collecting the number of bytes sent r...

Github user olegz commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/176#issuecomment-172556905 There is also a compile warning in the catch clause preceding the place where you made you changes ``` } catch (final IOException e) {

[GitHub] nifi pull request: NIFI-1384 Changed DocumentWriter to accept Clas...

Github user olegz commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/171#issuecomment-172564889 At the moment I agree, this should not be merged as it was primarily done to start the conversation -

[GitHub] nifi pull request: NIFI-1384 Changed DocumentWriter to accept Clas...

Github user olegz closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/171 --- 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

Re: Component documentation improvements

Oleg, Interesting document, what impact would it have on existing installations of NIFI? What would be the upgrade path for Custom Processors? Are we breaking compatibility with the previous way of doing documentation? Why not create a simple content repository that can hold the documentation

Re: Component documentation improvements

Josh FWIW, let’s use WIKI comments to maintain a discussion. It will be simpler in the end to compile a resolution and move on. Yet, I’ll reply here anyway. Yes, there will be breaking changes. Its not a question of IF, but rather WHEN. What we can do is make it less painful by introducing

[GitHub] nifi pull request: NIFI-1333 fixed FlowController shutdown deadloc...

Github user olegz commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/148#issuecomment-172583777 I am not surprised, that's why I was against having a lock in a shutdown in the first place. It doesn't bring any value since If you follow the logic of shutting down

[GitHub] nifi pull request: NIFI-1333 fixed FlowController shutdown deadloc...

Github user trkurc commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/148#issuecomment-172582763 I think it may still deadlock. I scripted a startup and shutdown over and over again for a few days, and it still was hanging on occasion. I should have added a jstack..

Re: Component documentation improvements

Very much agreed Dan. I submitted my comments on the wiki. On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 6:06 PM, dan bress wrote: > I just tossed some comments on the wikipage. > > TL;DR I took a look at generating docs as part of the build months ago. I > think its doable, and someone should

Re: Component documentation improvements

I’d like to add comments to the wiki, may I have permissions for that? Thanks in advance, Matt On 1/18/16, 6:27 PM, "Joe Witt" wrote: >Very much agreed Dan. I submitted my comments on the wiki. > >On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 6:06 PM, dan bress wrote: >>

Re: Component documentation improvements

Joe As a general rule, breaking changes will happen in any and every framework and/or product - as a general fact of life. And that is what I meant with my statement. Having said that I do admit that reading it again comes across as if the decision about the approach proposed in the wiki has

Re: Component documentation improvements

doing now. Try again in 30 secs. On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 6:54 PM, Matthew Burgess wrote: > I’d like to add comments to the wiki, may I have permissions for that? > > Thanks in advance, > Matt > > > > On 1/18/16, 6:27 PM, "Joe Witt" wrote: > >>Very much

Re: Component documentation improvements

I’m in! Thanks :) On 1/18/16, 6:54 PM, "Joe Witt" wrote: >doing now. Try again in 30 secs. > >On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 6:54 PM, Matthew Burgess wrote: >> I’d like to add comments to the wiki, may I have permissions for that? >> >> Thanks in advance,

[GitHub] nifi pull request: NIFI-569 Creating basis for integration-tests i...

Github user apiri commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/173#issuecomment-172666378 Sorry went off on a tangent on the previous part. In favor of that but curious as to what the destination should be. Didn't do the integration test classes myself but can

[GitHub] nifi pull request: NIFI-569 Creating basis for integration-tests i...

Github user mcgilman commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/173#issuecomment-172646806 Reviewing... --- 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

[GitHub] nifi pull request: NIFI-569 Creating basis for integration-tests i...

Github user apiri commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/173#issuecomment-172661289 Not opposed but not sure how to best accomplish this. A section in the dev or contrib guide talking about how to activate and or what is currently present seem reasonable?

[GitHub] nifi pull request: NIFI-569 Creating basis for integration-tests i...

Github user mcgilman commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/173#issuecomment-172668316 Yep, I realize this PR was just trying to establish the baseline and create the build infrastructure. I can certainly +1 that aspect. I was just wondering if this sort

Re: Component documentation improvements

Oleg, "Yes, there will be breaking changes. Its not a question of IF, but rather WHEN." I disagree. It is always a question of IF. We have to be extremely judicious in the use of breaking changes and we owe the user/developer based excellent justification in such cases. I will comment on the

[GitHub] nifi pull request: NIFI-569 Creating basis for integration-tests i...

Github user mcgilman commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/173#issuecomment-172657153 The build infrastructure changes look good. I realize the motivation for this ticket was establishing this baseline. However, I wanted to try to run the integration

[GitHub] nifi pull request: NIFI-569 Creating basis for integration-tests i...

Github user apiri commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/173#issuecomment-172669320 Gotcha. There were some good suggestions on the related thread on the mailing list but there are limited classes that fall into this category at this time. Not necessarily

Extension Registry

All I have just published initial set of updates to the Extension Registry page on the wiki - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFI/Extension+Registry The initial work was started by Bryan Bende a while back and I hope I’ve managed to incorporate all of his points where relevant.

[GitHub] nifi pull request: NIFI-569 Creating basis for integration-tests i...

Github user mcgilman commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/173#issuecomment-172665743 Highlighting the existence of the new profile is a good idea and we should do that. However, I was specifically referring to the AWS integration tests that are part of

Re: Component documentation improvements

I just tossed some comments on the wikipage. TL;DR I took a look at generating docs as part of the build months ago. I think its doable, and someone should pursue it. On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 2:38 PM Joe Witt wrote: > Oleg, > > "Yes, there will be breaking changes. Its not