I’m working with Bryan Rosander to close out NIFI-3024, NIFI-2655, and NIFI-2653. I believe Matt Burgess is working on NIFI-3011 and we investigated some alternate TLS config options for the new version of the client library.
Is there any alternative to excluding the GetTwitter processor? Using Johnzon [1] or the Android re-implementation [2] discussed in the mailing list thread? [1] https://johnzon.apache.org/ <https://johnzon.apache.org/> [2] https://developer.android.com/reference/org/json/package-summary.html Andy LoPresto [email protected] [email protected] PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > On Nov 15, 2016, at 3:58 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: > > Team > > Very happy to see that we are down to three items remaining tagged to > 1.1.0. Solid effort over the recent weeks to close the gap including work > to get past the now category x Jason dependency we had. The most notable > impact from that is the wildly popular GetTwitter processor, the fav new > nifi user and demo processor, can no longer be included in the default > build. It is optionally available if users choose to build and use it but > we won't distribute binaries that have it. > > I see some review movement on some patch available but untagged items. > > I plan to kick off the 1.1.0 rc work soon. Perhaps Thurs or Fri. Anyone > have any outstanding items? > > Thanks > Joe > > On Nov 8, 2016 2:12 PM, "Joe Witt" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ryan > > Not officially but I think we should try to close this thing out and > start a vote in the next week or two at most. > > I'm going through the tickets again now. There is also a new issue of > the json-p license falling out of favor in Apache legal terms and > becoming Category-X. Am looking into that now. > > Thanks > Joe > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Ryan Ward <[email protected]> wrote: >> Joe - Is there a target date for 1.1? >> >> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Team, >>> >>> Just an update on things with working toward an Apache NiFi 1.1.0 >>> release. There are still about 33 JIRAs there now and some are >>> awaiting review and are some are under active progress. Yet there is >>> good traction and progress. I think we should just stay vigilant with >>> what makes it in and keep working it down. So let's please shoot for >>> a couple weeks from now. If it is ready sooner I'll jump on it. >>> >>> Thanks >>> Joe >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Team, >>>> >>>> There are 31 open JIRAs at present tagged to Apache NiFi 1.1.0. Let's >>>> avoiding putting more in there for now at least without a discussion. >>>> Of the 31 JIRAs there the vast majority need review so we should be >>>> able to close these down fairly quickly as long as we don't let the >>>> list grow. >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> joe >>>> >>>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Edgardo Vega <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>>> Joe, >>>>> >>>>> Appreciate the offer it isn't my PR. I was just using it as an > example. >>> All >>>>> mine are currently closed, which I greatly appreciate. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>>> Edgardo >>>>> >>>>> On Friday, October 14, 2016, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Edgardo, >>>>>> >>>>>> You mentioned a PR from August. I'd be happy to help you work that >>>>>> through review. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks >>>>>> Joe >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Edgardo Vega < > [email protected] >>>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote: >>>>>>> I have agreed that at this point a release is important. My goal > was >>> try >>>>>> to >>>>>>> squeeze in a much goodness as possible into the release, but the >>>>>> important >>>>>>> bug fixes should come first. Getting 1.x into a state where the >>> release >>>>>>> notes don't say that it is geared toward developers and testers is >>> really >>>>>>> huge. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think Nifi is a great community otherwise I would participate in >>> the >>>>>>> mailing list, create Jira tickets and pull requests. I am only >>> trying to >>>>>>> strengthen the great thing that is going on here. We can always do >>>>>> better. >>>>>>> I was not trying to put down this community only to participate and >>> make >>>>>> it >>>>>>> better. I think this conversation is an indication of how great > this >>>>>>> community is. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Maybe I am being sensitive about this issue and trying to > strengthen >>> the >>>>>>> nifi community even more, after coming from a conference where it > was >>>>>>> reported there was lots of excitement at first and now the >>> participation >>>>>> in >>>>>>> the community has really died down and they are struggling. I don't >>> want >>>>>> to >>>>>>> see that happen here. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Edgardo >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:37 AM, Andre <[email protected] >>>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Edgardo, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thank you for your feedback. We hear your comments and as a >>> committer I >>>>>> can >>>>>>>> share we are constantly looking to improve the PR process, having >>>>>> already >>>>>>>> taken many of the steps you suggest. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> However, it is important to notice that the number of PRs should >>> not be >>>>>>>> seen as a metric of engagement by the development community: Most >>> of us >>>>>>>> will submit PRs so that our work can be carefully reviewed by our >>> peers >>>>>> and >>>>>>>> some of us will use JIRA patches to provide contributions. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Having said that, it is true that some PRs may sit idle for a long >>> time >>>>>> and >>>>>>>> we are working to improve this pipeline. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It was therefore no coincidence that I browsed most of the PRs >>>>>> performing >>>>>>>> a triage of items that have been superseded or diverged from the >>> current >>>>>>>> code base. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In fact, less than a month ago the dev team closed a number of >>> stalled >>>>>> and >>>>>>>> superseded PRs (commit cc5e827aa1dfe2f376e9836380ba63c15269eea8). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Despite all the above, I think Joe has a point. The master > contain a >>>>>> series >>>>>>>> of important bug fixes and suspect the community would benefit > from >>> a >>>>>>>> release sooner rather than later. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Once again, thank you for your feedback and contribution. It is >>> good to >>>>>>>> have you here. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Andre >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Edgardo Vega < >>> [email protected] >>>>>> <javascript:;>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Joe - You are correct I was mentioning the PRs that are > currently >>>>>> open. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Regardless of how it happens reducing the count of open PRs I >>> believe >>>>>> to >>>>>>>> be >>>>>>>>> extremely important. Maybe I was hoping that the release could > be >>> a >>>>>>>> forcing >>>>>>>>> function to make that happen. I believe that developers are more >>>>>> willing >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>> contribute when they see that their PRs will actually be able >>> accepted >>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>> merged into the code base. Having a low number of open PRs in >>> progress >>>>>>>> is a >>>>>>>>> great indication that the main nifi developers are fully engaged >>> with >>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> community. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There are a few PRs that don't have any comments from committers >>> at >>>>>> all. >>>>>>>> I >>>>>>>>> found one from August in that state. If that was my PR I don't >>> think I >>>>>>>>> would be so willing to put another one in anytime soon. I do get >>> that >>>>>>>>> sometime PRs get stalled by the originator, if so maybe a rule >>> about >>>>>>>>> closing them after a certain amount of time or being taken over >>> by a >>>>>> core >>>>>>>>> contributor if they think it worthwhile. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I would like to shoutout to James Wing on my last PR he was > quick >>> to >>>>>>>>> review, provided great comments, testing, and even some > additional >>>>>> code. >>>>>>>> It >>>>>>>>> was a great PR experience. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Edgardo >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Joe Percivall < >>>>>> [email protected] <javascript:;>. >>>>>>>>> invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Joe, I think you misread. Edgardo is referring to the Pull >>> Requests >>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>> are currently open, not the tickets assigned to the 1.1.0 >>> version. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I think these goals (releasing 1.1.0 and cutting down the PR >>> count) >>>>>>>>> should >>>>>>>>>> be two different efforts. Doing a thorough job reviewing > takes a >>>>>>>>>> significant amount of time from both the reviewer and >>> contributor. >>>>>> In >>>>>>>>> order >>>>>>>>>> to cut it down significantly would take much longer than a >>> couple >>>>>> days. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Also there has already been a lot of great new features and > bug >>>>>> fixes >>>>>>>>>> contributed to the 1.X line and I don't think it's worth >>> holding up >>>>>> a >>>>>>>>> 1.1.0 >>>>>>>>>> release for tickets not assigned to this fix version. As an >>> added >>>>>> bonus >>>>>>>>>> though, I think many of the tickets tagged as 1.1.0 have PRs >>> already >>>>>>>> open >>>>>>>>>> so closing those will make a large dent in the PR count. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Joe >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - - - - - - >>>>>>>>>> Joseph Percivall >>>>>>>>>> linkedin.com/in/Percivall >>>>>>>>>> e: [email protected] <javascript:;> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, October 13, 2016 3:58 PM, Joe Witt < >>> [email protected] >>>>>> <javascript:;>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> There are less than 30 right now. Many of the roughly 90+ > JIRAs >>>>>>>>>> opened on 1.1.0 were easily dispositioned to 1.2.0 or closed > or >>> just >>>>>>>>>> had fix versions removed. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> We will need to have a push over the next bunch of days to > deal >>> with >>>>>>>>>> reviewing/merging/moving the remaining items. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>>> Joe >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Edgardo Vega < >>>>>> [email protected] <javascript:;>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Joe, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> There are 75 PRs currently open. Why not make a push over > the >>> next >>>>>>>>> bunch >>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>> days to get them closed and then cut the release after that. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Edgardo >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Joe Witt < >>> [email protected] >>>>>> <javascript:;>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Team, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> There have been a ton of bugs fixed a few nice features. I >>> would >>>>>>>> like >>>>>>>>>>>> to move to get Apache NiFi 1.1.0 release going pretty much >>> based >>>>>> on >>>>>>>>>>>> where we are now and plan to move most tickets to a new >>> Apache >>>>>> NiFi >>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2.0 version. We can try to get back on our roughly 6-8 >>> week >>>>>>>> release >>>>>>>>>>>> schedule and shoot for a mid to late Nov release for NiFi >>> 1.2.0 >>>>>> this >>>>>>>>>>>> way as well. Please advise if anyone has any other views on >>>>>> this. In >>>>>>>>>>>> the mean time I'll get the wheels in motion so you'll be >>> seeing a >>>>>>>> lot >>>>>>>>>>>> of JIRA/issue updates to move version around. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>>>>> Joe >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Tony Kurc < >>> [email protected] >>>>>> <javascript:;>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds good Joe. I have no issue to you doing the rm'ing >>> for >>>>>> it. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 13, 2016 8:19 AM, "Joe Witt" <[email protected] >>>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Team, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are a lot of great fixes and improvements on the >>> master >>>>>>>> line >>>>>>>>>> now >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and we're at a good time window to start pushing for a >>>>>> release. >>>>>>>>>> There >>>>>>>>>>>>>> are, however, about 90+ JIRAs assigned to 1.1.0 which > are >>>>>> open. >>>>>>>>> I'm >>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to go through them and remove fix versions where >>>>>>>> appropriate. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm happy to take on RM task for this release though if >>>>>> someone >>>>>>>>> else >>>>>>>>>>>>>> would like to take that on please advise. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Joe >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Edgardo >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Edgardo >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Edgardo >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>>> Edgardo >>>>> >>>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >>>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
