As long as someone has commit privileges they can certainly step up to
take on release management. The only special bit in a release beyond
commit privileges is needing sufficient binding votes. Thanks Joe for
offering to take that on.
Joe
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:24 PM, Aldrin Piri wrote:
>
It is also my belief that we have not had anyone but PMC members perform
the release process. Certainly no objections here and, as mentioned in the
link, still requires the same PMC validation.
I've seen this occur in some other ASF projects as well and certainly is
beneficial to our community to
Does anyone object to Joe Skora being release manager for 0.7.1? Based on
this [1] I don't see any reason he shouldn't be able to. I've offered out
of band to assist.
1. http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html#release_manager
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Tony Kurc wrote:
> Well I'
Thanks, I'll see if I can do that. Might be difficult since we don't build
our own nifi binaries. I could use the 0.7.x RC when it comes out.
But could you tell me what processor you were using when you had that issue
because the error looks different? Also, if that processor was an
in-house one,
Devin,
This sounds a lot like the issue documented in NIFI-2551 [1]. Since you
are using NiFi 0.7.0, you might try to build the latest code in the 0.x
branch and see if this version resolves your problem.
-- Mike
[1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-2551
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 6:
I'm having an issue with an in-house processor (not for email inboxes).
Only seems to happen periodically on heavy loads, not in dev environments.
Based on the stack trace the Illegal self-suppression is happening in the
framework code and it seems to be masking the original exception that was
thro
Well I'm certainly willing to not do it! That being said, I don't know that
we've had a non-PMC member do the job of RM'ing (I tried to find logs of it
all, and failed).
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Joe Skora wrote:
> I'm willing take a try at RM or work with someone to understand it in the
I'm willing take a try at RM or work with someone to understand it in the
future.
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Tony Kurc wrote:
> Awesome. I propose we start building a release candidate off of
> 40618364e70a966f9c1e425674b53b22b1fb0fb0 soon.
>
> I believe I was the sole volunteer to RM, and
Jason,
Sorry to hear of the troubles. With respect to bug #1, you shouldn't have
to recreate the entire instance. Having said that, InvokeScriptedProcessor
(ISP) is a strange beast in terms of its configuration lifecycle, since a
scripted processor is enclosed and managed by its parent
InvokeScrip
