Yes, it's on my list for 1.0
Oleg
> On Jun 1, 2016, at 08:33, Joe Witt wrote:
>
> I had an off-list conversation with OlegZ about this recently and he
> said he planned on trying to tackle this for 1.x timing. Oleg - you
> have any updates you can share on the JIRA?
>
> It is definitely an im
I had an off-list conversation with OlegZ about this recently and he
said he planned on trying to tackle this for 1.x timing. Oleg - you
have any updates you can share on the JIRA?
It is definitely an important item for those that want to do effective
CM which is diff friendly. Is just a step of
What ever happened to the following from the 6-12 month roadmap that was
posted a while ago?
Deterministic Template Export
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-826
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 10:07 PM, Joe Witt wrote:
> I'll take release manager duties for 0.7.0 unless someone else with
>
I'll take release manager duties for 0.7.0 unless someone else with
committer status really wants to give it a go.
Right now there are 43 tickets assigned to it. I'll go through and
punt ones on there that seem stalled or deferrable. Of course, if
there are any that are particularly important to
Also looking forward to using the TransformJSON processor:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/blob/master/nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/TransformJSON.java
Nice choice with JOLT there.
We're doing a custom one for jolt
I'm looking forward to 0.7.. Plenty of awesome features, like SSL with the
AMQP processors (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1521)
Thanks!
On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 7:52 AM, Joe Witt wrote:
> Ok just to wrap up this thread. Will push a couple efforts
> 1) Will start pulling together an
Ok just to wrap up this thread. Will push a couple efforts
1) Will start pulling together an 0.7 release
2) Will update the roadmap slide to put in tentative timing/major
elements in the roadmap on the wiki page
And as for whether 0.7 ends up being the last release of the 0.x line
will just depend
I think Mike’s read on the published guidelines is correct, but I agree with
Joe that if we release 0.7 two weeks before 1.0, feature development that is
merged after 0.7 does not need to be backported. Maybe this is something we
should clarify on the wiki once we reach a consensus.
Andy LoPre
Mike
I agree with the letter of the reading so this thread is to discuss
the spirit of it and how to best apply it to our situation and
community now. Whether it is 'just before' or 'just after' or 'same
time' I think it is within the intent. I just want us to be clear
what it is. It is extra w
The way I read the release support document, I don't think the feature
cut-off for the 0.x branch happens when we confirm a release date for 1.0,
I think it occurs once we actually release 1.0. Maybe the cut-off can
happen once we declare the first 1.0 release candidate. I'm sure we will
spend si
I believe that is right Andy. The support guide articulates that we
could do a feature release upon request if there was some specific
need a community member had but that otherwise the only releases on an
older line still supported would be focused on security/data loss type
items.
Thanks
Joe
O
This schedule seems appropriate to me. Once 0.7.0 is released and we confirm
the release date for 1.0, feature development is completely targeted to 1.0,
correct? Security and data loss bug fixes would still be backported, but new
features would not.
Andy LoPresto
alopre...@apache.org
alopresto
Ok - i'm good with an 0.7 release too and think it is a good idea. I
am happy to RM the release.
I'd like to select a date at which we're happy to call the 0.x line
then feature complete which means 0.7 would be the last feature
bearing 0.x release and from then on it would be bug fixes only
cons
Agreed! I would like to see 0.7 within 2-3 weeks as there are a lot of
improvements and new features/components in it already, and would like to give
it some miles before 1.0.
Oleg
> On May 17, 2016, at 4:02 PM, James Wing wrote:
>
> I'm definitely in favor of releasing 0.7.0, but I don't thin
I'm definitely in favor of releasing 0.7.0, but I don't think we need be
rigid about the schedule. If delaying 0.7.0 a few weeks (2-4?) helps pace
us towards a 1.0 in mid- to late-Summer, that seems reasonable to me. Do
we believe that is still a likely target?
Thanks,
James
On Tue, May 17, 20
Team,
Want to start zeroing in on the details of the next releases. We had
a good set of discussions around this back in January and have since
been executing along this general path [1].
On the 0.x line the next release would be 0.7.0. There does appear to
be a lot of useful improvements/featu
16 matches
Mail list logo
