Davy

Indeed it is andI am hoping that it will make it int o the next release (can’t 
see why).

Cheers
Oleg

On Dec 14, 2016, at 9:20 AM, Andrew Psaltis 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Davy,
Sorry for the delay in my response. I did see your comments on my P/R, 
appreciate them and meant to respond to those. The current state of GetTCP is 
that is it going to undergo refactoring and potentially a redesign to better 
align with NiFi best practices. I am not 100% of the timeline for that at this 
time.

Thanks,
Andrew

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 3:31 AM, ddewaele 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi Andrew,

I noticed you've created a pull request to get this in the Nifi codebase and
that there were some review discussions going on.

I was wondering what the status is on the GetTCP processor.

I've also logged some issues in your Github repo and can create some PRs if
you like.




--
View this message in context: 
http://apache-nifi-users-list.2361937.n4.nabble.com/Re-Processors-on-the-fly-for-many-sensor-devices-tp47p427.html
Sent from the Apache NiFi Users List mailing list archive at 
Nabble.com<http://nabble.com>.



--
Thanks,
Andrew

Subscribe to my book: Streaming Data<http://manning.com/psaltis>
[https://static.licdn.com/scds/common/u/img/webpromo/btn_viewmy_160x25.png]<https://www.linkedin.com/pub/andrew-psaltis/1/17b/306>
twiiter: @itmdata<http://twitter.com/intent/user?screen_name=itmdata>

Reply via email to