nifi-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Moser <moser...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Closing in on a 0.x release
Date Tue, 11 Oct 2016 15:30:42 GMT
NIFI-2774 is now complete and merged to both master and 0.x branches.  +1
on a release from the 0.x branch now.

-- Mike


On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Michael Moser <moser.mw@gmail.com> wrote:

> I feel that Oleg was really close, and it would be nice for this to be in
> 0.7.1 but it isn't necessary. I did functional testing on the current state
> of the PR and I am +1 in that respect.
>
> -- Mike
>
> On Oct 10, 2016 9:40 AM, "Tony Kurc" <trkurc@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> So in reviewing the Jiras, it looks like the two tickets NIFI-2429,
>> NIFI-2874 were merged in and NIFI-2774 is still under discussion. Oleg,
>> Mike, are we feeling like we're close, or would this best fit in the next
>> 0.x release?
>>
>> Tony
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Michael Moser <moser.mw@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Thanks Joe Witt, I reviewed that PR and got it into 0.x.
>> >
>> > Since we decided that our next 0.x release will be 0.7.1, I am going
>> > through JIRA and for all Resolved tickets marked against 0.8.0 I am
>> > changing their Fix Version to 0.7.1.  Open tickets I will not change.
>> >
>> > -- Mike
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Joe Witt <joe.witt@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Team,
>> > >
>> > > Mark Payne just opened this one: https://issues.apache.org/
>> > > jira/browse/NIFI-2874
>> > >
>> > > It should probably be in this release if able.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks
>> > > Joe
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Michael Moser <moser.mw@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > > I am reviewing the PR for NIFI-2774 ConsumeJMS and we need someone
>> to
>> > > > review the PR for NIFI-2429 PersistentProvenanceRepository.  Once
>> > those
>> > > are
>> > > > complete I think we can start the process to cut 0.7.1.
>> > > >
>> > > > -- Mike
>> > > >
>> > > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 9:49 AM, Tony Kurc <trkurc@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> So, sounds like we have enough support to go ahead. How are we
>> feeling
>> > > >> about what our timeline should be on this?
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 11:14 PM, Joe Witt <joe.witt@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> > +1 to an 0.7.1 with the bugs that have been addressed already.
>> > > >> > Even bigger +1 to Tony volunteering as RM!
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > Thanks
>> > > >> > Joe
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 10:24 PM, Brandon DeVries <brd@jhu.edu>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >> > > I agree sooner rather than later for cutting 0.7.1.
I think
>> Mike's
>> > > >> > question
>> > > >> > > to some degree was whether or not some of those tickets
were
>> worth
>> > > >> fixing
>> > > >> > > in 0.x. For example, I'm not sure how much I care about:
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > NIFI-2571 deprecate NiFiProperties.getInstance()
>> > > >> > > NIFI-2163 nifi.sh follow the Linux service spec
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > On the other, there are some I would like to see, even
if its
>> in
>> > > 0.7.2
>> > > >> or
>> > > >> > > 0.8.0, e.g.:
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > NIFI-2433 "Primary Node Only" processors
>> > > >> > > NIFI-2562 PutHDFS data corruption
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > But, there are a number of things that are currently
committed
>> (or
>> > > have
>> > > >> > > patch available) that I'd like to see available as soon
as
>> > > possible. So
>> > > >> > > rather than wait for more "nice to haves", I'd rather
address
>> the
>> > > >> > immediate
>> > > >> > > needs... Immediately.
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > Brandon
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 10:15 PM Tony Kurc <trkurc@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > >> I think I brought this up before, I sort of expected
we may do
>> > more
>> > > >> 0.x
>> > > >> > >> releases. I certainly think the more the bugs we
can fix, the
>> > > merrier,
>> > > >> > and
>> > > >> > >> it seems like your list is a good initial strawman
for a bug
>> fix
>> > > >> > release of
>> > > >> > >> we collectively would like to put one together.
>> > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > >> While the tickets with work to do on them would
be great to
>> have
>> > > >> fixed,
>> > > >> > I
>> > > >> > >> personally would rather see a release with some
fixes and a
>> > couple
>> > > >> known
>> > > >> > >> issues than holding off for "perfection", especially
as a lot
>> of
>> > > our
>> > > >> > effort
>> > > >> > >> is on 1.x. Are you asking if effort would be wasted
if patches
>> > were
>> > > >> > >> developed for the 0.x issues?
>> > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > >> Fwiw, I certainly could do the RM work if there
is
>> > interest/demand
>> > > >> > signal
>> > > >> > >> for in another 0.x.
>> > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > >> On Sep 27, 2016 5:28 PM, "Michael Moser" <moser.mw@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > >> > All,
>> > > >> > >> >
>> > > >> > >> > I would like to start the discussion of making
the next
>> > official
>> > > >> > release
>> > > >> > >> of
>> > > >> > >> > the 0.x branch.  I propose that this release
be numbered
>> 0.7.1
>> > > since
>> > > >> > it
>> > > >> > >> > seems that only bug fixes have occurred on
the 0.x branch
>> since
>> > > >> 0.7.0
>> > > >> > was
>> > > >> > >> > released.
>> > > >> > >> >
>> > > >> > >> > The JIRA link [1] below can show you the tickets
that have
>> been
>> > > >> > completed
>> > > >> > >> > in the 0.x branch.  There are 33 tickets in
this list that
>> are
>> > > >> > resolved.
>> > > >> > >> >
>> > > >> > >> > Here is a list of JIRA tickets that are not
yet complete
>> that
>> > we
>> > > >> need
>> > > >> > to
>> > > >> > >> > decide what to do with.
>> > > >> > >> >
>> > > >> > >> > Patch Available
>> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2429 PersistentProvenanceRepository
>> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2774 ConsumeJMS
>> > > >> > >> >
>> > > >> > >> > Open against 0.7.0
>> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2383 ListFiles
>> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2433 "Primary Node Only" processors (fixed
in master
>> but
>> > > this
>> > > >> > ticket
>> > > >> > >> > is for 0.x)
>> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2798 Zookeeper security upgrade
>> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2801 Kafka processors documentation
>> > > >> > >> >
>> > > >> > >> > Other high priority bugs not yet specifically
targeted to
>> the
>> > 0.x
>> > > >> > branch,
>> > > >> > >> > should we try to work these?
>> > > >> > >> > NIFI-1696 Event Driven processors
>> > > >> > >> > NIFI-1912 PutEmail content-type
>> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2163 nifi.sh follow the Linux service
spec
>> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2409 StoreKiteInDataset invalid URI
>> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2562 PutHDFS data corruption
>> > > >> > >> > NIFI-2571 deprecate NiFiProperties.getInstance()
>> > > >> > >> >
>> > > >> > >> > -- Mike
>> > > >> > >> >
>> > > >> > >> > [1] -
>> > > >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-2801?jql=
>> > > >> > >> > project%20%3D%20NIFI%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20%280.7.1%
>> > > >> 2C%200.8.0%29
>> > > >> > >> >
>> > > >> > >>
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message