Oh meant to send a link to this too:
> ARG
> NIFI_BINARY_PATH=${NIFI_BINARY_PATH:-/nifi/${NIFI_VERSION}/nifi-${NIFI_VERSION}-bin.zip}
https://github.com/apache/nifi/blob/373498445fe589e2d4855a0730fbb9127f0b4452/nifi-docker/dockerhub/Dockerfile#L30
> On Nov 4, 2021, at 9:09 PM, Kevin Doran <kdoran.apa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Joe and Chris,
>
> Our Dockerfile that we use to build the Dockerhub image defaults to looking
> for 1.15.0 instead of NiFi-1.15.0, but it is a variable that we can override,
> so this is easy to workaround incase the release folder does change. Agree
> its nice to keep the tree structure consistent when we can.
>
> I’m about to do my verification and will also check the single user with the
> docker image as part of that.
>
> Cheers,
> Kevin
>
>> On Nov 4, 2021, at 6:44 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Chris,
>>
>> Yeah I should have just put it in 1.15.0 instead of nifi/1.15.0.
>> Should generally not really matter so the docker angle there is
>> interesting. Not sure why our docker images would have any
>> relationship to our dist/dev storage. But when I move them into the
>> release folder I can try to ensure I place them only in 1.15.0 instead
>> of nifi/1.15.0.
>>
>> That directory the prov stuff makes does linger and can be annoying so
>> thanks for tackling that. Saw the PR. Will take a look soon if
>> nobody else has.
>>
>> Will keep an eye on your findings related to docker builds not working
>> with username/password things. Hopefully others can chime in there.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Send
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 2:06 PM Chris Sampson
>> <chris.samp...@naimuri.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> Worryingly, when I do get the Docker Image to build (further changes to the
>>> Dockerfile), the auto-generated username and password from the startup logs
>>> aren't being accepted for login via my browser.
>>>
>>> I'll try to spend a little more time looking at this (but await input on my
>>> earlier question/concern also).
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> *Chris Sampson*
>>> IT Consultant
>>> chris.samp...@naimuri.com
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, 4 Nov 2021 at 20:47, Chris Sampson <chris.samp...@naimuri.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've got most of the way through the release check process in order to
>>>> vote for 1.15.0, but I wanted to check on a change in the distribution
>>>> release artifacts.
>>>>
>>>> For 1.14.0, the Dev artifacts were located at:
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/nifi/1.14.0/*
>>>> For 1.15.0, the Dev artifacts are located at:
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/nifi/nifi-1.15.0/*
>>>>
>>>> i.e. there's been a change of directory/path from <version> to
>>>> nifi-<version>.
>>>>
>>>> The reason I raise this is that I can no longer build a Docker Image using
>>>> the dockerhub/DockerBuild.sh script because it cannot find the artifacts to
>>>> download. This may not be a problem if the path change is only for the Dev
>>>> artifacts, but if the same change is going to happen for the released
>>>> artifacts, then the apache/nifi image (and presumably the
>>>> apache/nifi-registry, apache/nifi-toolkit and any minifi) convenience
>>>> images will no longer be possible as part of the Release, which will likely
>>>> be an issue for a number of users that have deployments using these images.
>>>>
>>>> I spotted this after rebasing my outstanding PR [1] for NIFI-8779 [2]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Additionally, I noted NIFI-9366 [3] after an unwanted directory was
>>>> created by the unit tests executed during building and testing 1.15.0-RC3.
>>>> I raised a PR [4] - this is a minor issue and not a reason to block any
>>>> release.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/5213
>>>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-8779
>>>>
>>>> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-9366
>>>> [4] https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/5510
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> *Chris Sampson*
>>>> IT Consultant
>>>> chris.samp...@naimuri.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 30 Oct 2021 at 01:52, Joe Witt <joew...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Otto
>>>>>
>>>>> Got ya. Yeah it was this way in 1.14 as well. And to be clear with every
>>>>> release what we are actually voting upon is the source release. Now the
>>>>> source release includes nifi, minifi, nifi registry, stateless nifi and
>>>>> toolkits among all the other having always been there goodies.
>>>>>
>>>>> Some of these things we make available in the form of convenience binaries
>>>>> to make it easier on folks to consume.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think you dont need to do any verification you would not have done
>>>>> before.
>>>>>
>>>>> But I do hope folks help maintain various ways of easing more folks
>>>>> knowing
>>>>> what to vet with a given release
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 5:34 PM Otto Fowler <ottobackwa...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> This release, we are verifying not only Nifi, but also Minifi Java. At
>>>>>> least that is my understanding.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This would be my first time having *anything* to do with minifi, i’ve
>>>>> not
>>>>>> even run it before.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As such, I think the RC validation guide needs to be update to include
>>>>> the
>>>>>> information about now validating nifi and minifi together.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Joe Witt <joew...@apache.org> <joew...@apache.org>
>>>>>> Reply: dev@nifi.apache.org <dev@nifi.apache.org> <dev@nifi.apache.org>
>>>>>> Date: October 25, 2021 at 11:59:39
>>>>>> To: dev@nifi.apache.org <dev@nifi.apache.org> <dev@nifi.apache.org>
>>>>>> Subject: [discuss] NiFi 1.15
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Team,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought I had already started such a thread but I dont see it so here
>>>>>> goes...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have made a ton of progress again and there are some super
>>>>>> important fixes as well. It is definitely time to kick out a 1.15.
>>>>>> My intent will be to attempt to pull together an RC this week.
>>>>>> Haven't done the analysis yet of what is hanging out there but will do
>>>>>> so. A quick look at all the features and fixes already landed though
>>>>>> make it clear we have more than enough to work with.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lets please use this thread for coordination on the RC rather than it
>>>>>> becoming the wish list. We have new features/fixes arriving all the
>>>>>> time - those can be addressed in normal channels.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>
