Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

Yup, your first paragraph is exactly right. Jon On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 1:23 PM Michael Miklavcic < michael.miklav...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm a little rusty on my C++, but to summarize what I've gathered from this > thread and linked code: The Bro plugin infrastructure does not support a > patch

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

I'm a little rusty on my C++, but to summarize what I've gathered from this thread and linked code: The Bro plugin infrastructure does not support a patch version currently, only major.minor (x.y). But bro-pkg, the bro package installation mechanism, does support it now. Which is unfortunately

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

I'm not aware of the bro plugin artifacts being used in any way. Jon On Thu, Sep 6, 2018, 10:59 Justin Leet wrote: > Do we use the artifacts directly at all? Or is it through bro-pkg only? > > Also, It's very possible I'm making a mountain out of a molehill here, and > if it's something that's

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

Do we use the artifacts directly at all? Or is it through bro-pkg only? Also, It's very possible I'm making a mountain out of a molehill here, and if it's something that's not particularly important, it might be worthwhile to just stick with what we did last time, and just table this discussion

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

Either is fine with me. If it's x.y in some parts of the app I prefer to keep it consistent throughout, but I'm also fine with lining up with Apache/Metron where we can. I also refreshed myself on why we avoided x.y.z initially and it was actually for this exact reason, we wanted consistent

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

Makes sense. Do we have any objection to just going to the artifact being 0.2? Or do we want to keep the mixed versioning and just live with it, at least for now? On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 8:58 PM zeo...@gmail.com wrote: > I think mattf-horton just did that as a part of convention. He handled >

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

I think mattf-horton just did that as a part of convention. He handled that part, and I did the 0.1 tagging (as a prereq to this ) last time the package was released. Jon

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

Any idea why we released it as 0.1.0 in the artifacts version? I'm fine with doing x.y if we need to, but I would like the artifact versioning to be consistent if possible. On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 8:26 PM zeo...@gmail.com wrote: > I lied, we didn't need to update our btests because it's limited

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

I lied, we didn't need to update our btests because it's limited to a major and minor version. https://github.com/apache/metron-bro-plugin-kafka/blob/master/src/Plugin.cc#L33-L34 Jon On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 8:10 PM zeo...@gmail.com wrote: > I looked into x.y.z back when we released 0.1 and it

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

I looked into x.y.z back when we released 0.1 and it was not possible in bro-pkg at the time but now it is . In order to do this, we'll also need to configure bro-pkg.meta to require the proper version of bro-pkg, as well as update the btests for

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

Long story short, while preparing the release candidate, I discovered our metron-bro-plugin-kafka is inconsistently versioned. In the repo, it's x.y (e.g. 0.2) See: https://github.com/apache/metron-bro-plugin-kafka/blob/master/VERSION#L18 In our released artifact, it's x.y.z (e.g. 0.1.0) See

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

As an update, I'll be working on starting the release process rolling today. The PCAP Query panel feature branch is in master and I haven't heard of any other potential blockers. I'd appreciate everyone updating their JIRAs with their state (complete, etc.) and version (0.6.0) as needed. Do we

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

+1 here as well to the proposed releases. On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 11:06 AM Casey Stella wrote: > +1 to both releases, this is plenty for an 0.6.0 and a 0.2.0 > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 11:04 AM Justin Leet > wrote: > > > I just sent a thread about release cadence. Jon, I'd recommend starting

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

+1 to both releases, this is plenty for an 0.6.0 and a 0.2.0 On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 11:04 AM Justin Leet wrote: > I just sent a thread about release cadence. Jon, I'd recommend starting a > thread on a 1.0 roadmap. I thought about merging the threads, but I think > that's just going to result

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

I just sent a thread about release cadence. Jon, I'd recommend starting a thread on a 1.0 roadmap. I thought about merging the threads, but I think that's just going to result in more crosstalk, so I'll let you start that conversation. On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 10:37 AM Nick Allen wrote: > +1 to

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

+1 to a 0.6.0 release that includes the Pcap Panel and Solr work. +1 to doing a 0.2.0 release for metron-bro-plugin-kafka. I *think* we need to do the plugin release first, so that the 0.6.0 Metron release will point to plugin 0.2.0. FWIW, here are the changes since the last release. 6 days

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

I was actually going to kick out another thread in a little bit around our release schedule, it should be out shortly. Good point on the metron-bro-plugin-kafka. I'm in favor of putting out a 0.2.0 release of it simultaneously. On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 9:48 AM zeo...@gmail.com wrote: > I agree

Re: [DISCUSS] Metron Release 0.6.0?

I agree - I would love to see a release not long after the PCAP FB gets into master, and 0.6.0 makes sense to me. I'd also like to see a 0.2 release of metron-bro-plugin-kafka. There is one new commit, and I have a PR open which is waiting on some tests before it's ready to be evaluated/merged.