Re: Desire to view more than 100 items within a queue
This issue was discussed in the past but never reached a consensus for an implementation that managed the concerns. My email is only to provide a link to that pull request and discussion, for those who are curious. https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/4641 -- Mike On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 5:47 PM Joe Witt wrote: > Edward > > Moved those cc'd to bcc including yourself. To really send/receive notes > you'll want to subscribe to the mailing list. > > We have to effectively draw the line somewhere at how much data is > retrieved and the click to content mechanism supported isn't meant to be > exhaustive as-is. We can/should add some pagination but when you consider > most queues are actually changing/evolving so fast it didn't make sense. > For the pattern you use which is effectively a dead-letter queue though > your ask makes perfect sense. > > Thanks > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 2:38 PM Edward Wang > wrote: > > > To whom it may concern, > > > > We are using NiFi to pass FlowFiles into ExecuteStreamCommand processors. > > Occasionally, running the scripts using that processor results in errors > > that route into the nonzero status relationship. > > We are pointing the nonzero status relationships to non-functioning > > processors, so that they will remain within the connection indefinitely > and > > we can track them. > > > > However, whenever we list the contents of a connection, we can only see > > the details of 100 FlowFiles at a time, despite the connection holding > more > > than 100. > > This is the case using the web interface and through calling the API. > > > > I was wondering if anyone had experience or any ideas regarding using > list > > queue to show all items. > > > > Thank you. > > > > Sincerely, > > Edward > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Release Timeline for NiFi 2.0.0-M3
Also agreed there. Profile should be there to exclude perhaps but include should be default. On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 6:30 AM David Handermann < exceptionfact...@apache.org> wrote: > Thanks for the replies thus far! > > With the goal of including the new UI, it seems like a good time to > move the module from an optional profile to part of the standard > build. That would make the release candidate build and review process > simpler, not requiring the optional build profile. > > Regards, > David Handermann > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 2:42 PM Matt Gilman > wrote: > > > > I agree. Including the updated UI and getting some feedback would be > great. > > > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 8:50 PM Joe Witt wrote: > > > > > Id be a big fan of including the new UI. > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 5:45 PM Pierre Villard < > > > pierre.villard...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks David, I'm happy to take care of a 1.26 release at the same > time. > > > > > > > > Regarding the M3 release, should the new UI be included and > instructions > > > > given on how to access it to start collecting feedback? I'm under the > > > > impression that almost all of the work has been done, no? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Pierre > > > > > > > > Le mar. 23 avr. 2024, 02:03, David Handermann < > > > exceptionfact...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > a écrit : > > > > > > > > > Team, > > > > > > > > > > We are approaching 300 Jira issues resolved for version 2.0.0-M3 > [1], > > > > > including a number of important dependency upgrades and Python > > > > > framework improvements. > > > > > > > > > > There are several open pull requests that are getting close to > > > > > completion, which should be possible to include in an upcoming > release > > > > > version. There is also a significant pull request [2] for > NIFI-12998 > > > > > [3] that includes some important changes to module directory > > > > > hierarchy, providing a clearer distinction between framework and > > > > > extensions, and implementing significant cleanup of dependency > > > > > declarations across the repository. > > > > > > > > > > With these changes in view, we should be ready for another > milestone > > > > > release soon after merging the above pull request. > > > > > > > > > > Another milestone release seems to be the best course of action for > > > > > now, providing the opportunity for additional review and testing > > > > > before a full 2.0.0 release version. > > > > > > > > > > I would be glad to handle Release Manager responsibilities for > > > > > 2.0.0-M3 when things are ready. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > David Handermann > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20NIFI%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.0.0-M3 > > > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/8677 > > > > > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-12998 > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Release Timeline for NiFi 2.0.0-M3
Thanks for the replies thus far! With the goal of including the new UI, it seems like a good time to move the module from an optional profile to part of the standard build. That would make the release candidate build and review process simpler, not requiring the optional build profile. Regards, David Handermann On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 2:42 PM Matt Gilman wrote: > > I agree. Including the updated UI and getting some feedback would be great. > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 8:50 PM Joe Witt wrote: > > > Id be a big fan of including the new UI. > > > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 5:45 PM Pierre Villard < > > pierre.villard...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Thanks David, I'm happy to take care of a 1.26 release at the same time. > > > > > > Regarding the M3 release, should the new UI be included and instructions > > > given on how to access it to start collecting feedback? I'm under the > > > impression that almost all of the work has been done, no? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Pierre > > > > > > Le mar. 23 avr. 2024, 02:03, David Handermann < > > exceptionfact...@apache.org > > > > > > > a écrit : > > > > > > > Team, > > > > > > > > We are approaching 300 Jira issues resolved for version 2.0.0-M3 [1], > > > > including a number of important dependency upgrades and Python > > > > framework improvements. > > > > > > > > There are several open pull requests that are getting close to > > > > completion, which should be possible to include in an upcoming release > > > > version. There is also a significant pull request [2] for NIFI-12998 > > > > [3] that includes some important changes to module directory > > > > hierarchy, providing a clearer distinction between framework and > > > > extensions, and implementing significant cleanup of dependency > > > > declarations across the repository. > > > > > > > > With these changes in view, we should be ready for another milestone > > > > release soon after merging the above pull request. > > > > > > > > Another milestone release seems to be the best course of action for > > > > now, providing the opportunity for additional review and testing > > > > before a full 2.0.0 release version. > > > > > > > > I would be glad to handle Release Manager responsibilities for > > > > 2.0.0-M3 when things are ready. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > David Handermann > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20NIFI%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.0.0-M3 > > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/8677 > > > > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-12998 > > > > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] UI Contributions
I also agree with this stance for an initial period of transition time, but this obviously has a huge impact on contributions. Without any kind of end date, I worry this is going to be policy indefinitely. Because of this, I tend to agree with what Rob said in the previous email. Maybe once 2.0 is released, that's the end of this transition period where UI features must be implemented twice (unless desired or needed for backward compatibility, as Rob pointed out). On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 8:17 AM Robert Fellows wrote: > The new UI has progressed quite well and I agree with this stance. However, > with 2.0 getting close, one could argue that new UI features should > definitely land in the new UI but only really need to land in the original > UI if desired or to support backward compatibility. > > --Rob > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 7:55 PM Scott Aslan wrote: > > > Thanks for sending this out Matt! I agree that at this point any new > > features to the frontend should be implemented in both the new and the > > existing UI. Updating the contributions guidelines seems appropriate as > > well. > > > > -Scott > > > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 4:07 PM Matt Gilman wrote: > > > > > Team, > > > > > > Substantial progress has been made on modernizing the NiFi UI under [1] > > and > > > [2]. As detailed in the JIRAs, this effort has been largely motivated > by > > > moving away from deprecated and unsupported dependencies. As we begin > the > > > process to transition to the new UI, we are at a point where any UI > > > contributions should target both the new UI and the existing UI. We've > > > updated the PR template detailing this and the README for the new UI > [3] > > to > > > help introduce folks making UI contributions to the layout of the > > > repository. It discusses the steps needed to build NiFi with the new UI > > > included and how to access it. > > > > > > Happy to discuss any questions folks may have. > > > > > > Matt > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-11481 > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-12400 > > > [3] https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/8693 > > > > > > > > -- > --- > Rob Fellows >
Re: [DISCUSS] UI Contributions
+1 Rob On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 8:17 AM Robert Fellows wrote: > The new UI has progressed quite well and I agree with this stance. However, > with 2.0 getting close, one could argue that new UI features should > definitely land in the new UI but only really need to land in the original > UI if desired or to support backward compatibility. > > --Rob > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 7:55 PM Scott Aslan wrote: > > > Thanks for sending this out Matt! I agree that at this point any new > > features to the frontend should be implemented in both the new and the > > existing UI. Updating the contributions guidelines seems appropriate as > > well. > > > > -Scott > > > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 4:07 PM Matt Gilman wrote: > > > > > Team, > > > > > > Substantial progress has been made on modernizing the NiFi UI under [1] > > and > > > [2]. As detailed in the JIRAs, this effort has been largely motivated > by > > > moving away from deprecated and unsupported dependencies. As we begin > the > > > process to transition to the new UI, we are at a point where any UI > > > contributions should target both the new UI and the existing UI. We've > > > updated the PR template detailing this and the README for the new UI > [3] > > to > > > help introduce folks making UI contributions to the layout of the > > > repository. It discusses the steps needed to build NiFi with the new UI > > > included and how to access it. > > > > > > Happy to discuss any questions folks may have. > > > > > > Matt > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-11481 > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-12400 > > > [3] https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/8693 > > > > > > > > -- > --- > Rob Fellows >
Re: [DISCUSS] UI Contributions
The new UI has progressed quite well and I agree with this stance. However, with 2.0 getting close, one could argue that new UI features should definitely land in the new UI but only really need to land in the original UI if desired or to support backward compatibility. --Rob On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 7:55 PM Scott Aslan wrote: > Thanks for sending this out Matt! I agree that at this point any new > features to the frontend should be implemented in both the new and the > existing UI. Updating the contributions guidelines seems appropriate as > well. > > -Scott > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 4:07 PM Matt Gilman wrote: > > > Team, > > > > Substantial progress has been made on modernizing the NiFi UI under [1] > and > > [2]. As detailed in the JIRAs, this effort has been largely motivated by > > moving away from deprecated and unsupported dependencies. As we begin the > > process to transition to the new UI, we are at a point where any UI > > contributions should target both the new UI and the existing UI. We've > > updated the PR template detailing this and the README for the new UI [3] > to > > help introduce folks making UI contributions to the layout of the > > repository. It discusses the steps needed to build NiFi with the new UI > > included and how to access it. > > > > Happy to discuss any questions folks may have. > > > > Matt > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-11481 > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-12400 > > [3] https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/8693 > > > -- --- Rob Fellows
