Need Reviewers for My PR's

HI, I have 3 PR's which are ready to merge from a couple of months. Below are Kudu Processor PR's which got a couple of reviews by Kudu PMC committer Grant Henke Kudu Processor: Kudu Put Operations, ready for merge https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/3610 Kudu Scan Operations, ready for merge

Re: nifi deploy automation - variables pass through (incl controller services)

The parameters work is on-going and will be in the next release which is 1.10.0. Releases don't really have specific timelines, but generally they happen every few months. Most likely 1.10.0 is a couple of weeks away, but depends on when active work is completed and when someone volunteers to make

Re: Azure Event Hub Processors Upgrade Problem

Hi Sunny, I replied to the first message, but I suppose you didn't receive it :) I have pasted the response below. When a user replies to the mailing list, it will go directly to dev@nifi.apache.org, rather than including your email address, so it's usually best to

Re: Azure Event Hub Processors Upgrade Problem

I can probably help, Sunny. I made some notes a few years ago on doing this. How this is done on later versions hasn't changed I don't think. Check out http://www.javahotchocolate.com/notes/nifi.html#20160323. Russ Bateman On 8/22/19 11:12 AM, Sunny Zhang wrote: Hi there, I’m a dev from

Azure Event Hub Processors Upgrade Problem

Hi there, I’m a dev from Microsoft Azure Event Hub team. We noticed that the Azure Event Hub processors on Nifi is using an very old version and may cause usability problems to the users. We want to help to upgrade it to the newest version! However, I met some problem trying to debug with

Re: nifi deploy automation - variables pass through (incl controller services)

Hi Bryan, Thanks for the reply. looks like even set-property will be a new feature, as current CLI doesn't have that. Could you please share timelines of these features if its in roadmap. 1. "set-property" 2. “parameters” The only option currently is set to set sensitive parameters

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NiFi Registry 0.5.0

+1 (non-binding) - Signatures and hashes match - Downloaded artifacts, build and tests passed with "-Pcontrib-check" - UI loads up as expected, made some quick manual testing - Verified LICENSE, NOTICE, and README, COMMIT ID Laszlo On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 4:09 PM Robert Fellows wrote: > +1

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NiFi Registry 0.5.0

+1 non-binding * Downloaded and imported KEYS * Downloaded release artifacts * Verified signatures and hashes * Built from source with "-Pcontrib-check" (not a clean maven repo, however) * Verified LICENSE, NOTICE, and README are present in source and assembly generated * Ran the binary (both

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NiFi Registry 0.5.0

Thanks Bryan for RMing. +1 (non-binding) I ran through the release helper guide: - signature ok, hashes match - mvn clean install -Pcontrib-check successfully completes with clean maven repository - all 4 integration test commands pass - README, NOTICE, LICENSE - ok. Minor note: README mentions

Re: [DISCUSS] Assembly size for 1.10

Given the time needed to do the other options "right," the removal of the optional NARs seems most prudent to avoid making the release of 1.10 unduly protracted. The listing above seems quite reasonable. We could still have these items be built but just not included in the resulting assembly.

Re: [DISCUSS] Assembly size for 1.10

I think putting all the NARs in an extension registry where users can pick and choose what they want will probably achieve the same thing. Either of those options require hosting binaries somewhere and making them accessible to be downloaded into a base installation. For the short term, I think

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NiFi Registry 0.5.0

# Verify the signature gpg --verify -v nifi-registry-0.5.0-source-release.zip.asc ✅ # Verify the hashes (sha256, sha512) match the source and what was provided in the vote email thread shasum -a 256 nifi-registry-0.5.0-source-release.zip ✅ shasum -a 512 nifi-registry-0.5.0-source-release.zip ✅ #