From dev-return-17809-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@nifi.apache.org Tue Jul 10 17:35:21 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id B2489180634 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 17:35:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 19260 invoked by uid 500); 10 Jul 2018 15:35:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@nifi.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@nifi.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@nifi.apache.org Received: (qmail 19238 invoked by uid 99); 10 Jul 2018 15:35:19 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 15:35:19 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id A283CCB387 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 15:35:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.889 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.889 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd1-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VdITLYZx74De for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 15:35:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-lf0-f49.google.com (mail-lf0-f49.google.com [209.85.215.49]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 5903A5F432 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 15:35:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf0-f49.google.com with SMTP id f18-v6so2589259lfc.2 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 08:35:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=87+FUHbfMXUXGZ5zYd04+Fk/ter/LJII01b4esCybR8=; b=sFW2FektOnIsWHEnTCU+unRCiLchb7/q6pYY4Osc8Ngvx2VKrEt0eLtX3fZcI/l/nG VTTNnpzAPJpnwyJs2JDPAIn7Gm8kydt35QBKyvGRlKA7qaqsExEQeodgDORii8AvloP3 MDrGwXUeZ/Tt1Y5C4o3MEqVmMOtoiFUvqTXaO12zZnYAL6vkCp+20NtHDuhQGAswr+J0 ugWu2JZq81+W0Ya6cF4aYVx5Thde5XWbxW8RFEr+nyxmJrwYV4KLgaYwTBYjpKiG/3C6 rxHRrUx+c6HdEVx/7L2wzLV2+7HIiQu4gNM0B1NZjHsac6vnkiWFlEZG3B7JCethl9ow 6hUA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=87+FUHbfMXUXGZ5zYd04+Fk/ter/LJII01b4esCybR8=; b=rphDHAWeANN4rs/7NROGW/eAmN7edwunjky1UaElbBP6TNz24yI5Utq/GRDDWOHwCA PcrO/HfgvvQGhQMp2Cc7QJ4WvPVX6y7DykLb0W6bj9wXWSWHyUQsNC3Z2vpY17pA2qS3 erEEU6Q7TiAJuJgCG+7Xw4CrYjn7fJnHutTA+M5cAv6s4KUjj/aN1bGVW0JDNXtwZ7Xj 7E7A3fr23uIHgB4UzyLj6BXmlh2C4bGbewI7WnX7cmWBtG3ioH1V61xm27PBKGQp9y1I rDdPRb0oxoxsMmp8AWqOns2maJGXIzDWvFhbM+iGbL7Ah9YQyuqf2E0um5+uZl1J4sXs 9vmg== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E0ddFLSpCv2EUO1tKD5yeMPL0omoUH8VWHzP/nNw/03y6nFmDVs Zu50mqqdnYlMSnX6Jq4dvJKDQ7DrVJRqXnYuDyI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdh++dEjgowz9MpfN30cXgGfghei8KlmqhyHphBc3jyzFkiy4gHMKpzIsFHLJTtA6OLAGZTKPJ3gOm5/lkUf1k= X-Received: by 2002:a19:5c8c:: with SMTP id u12-v6mr3407589lfi.98.1531236909857; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 08:35:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <764B629E-2831-43B2-B9A3-2B037EB4040C@apache.org> <638C6D2A-34AC-47F7-84BB-E8712180C635@apache.org> <00322721-3CE2-4F0C-BC91-59812F171C7D@apache.org> In-Reply-To: <00322721-3CE2-4F0C-BC91-59812F171C7D@apache.org> From: Mark Bean Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 11:34:57 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [discuss] should we do a nifi 1.7.1 release? To: dev@nifi.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001448650570a6e05b" --0000000000001448650570a6e05b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable FYI - NIFI-5368 has been completed and merged to master. It should be included in 1.7.1. Thanks, Mark On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 9:46 PM Andy LoPresto wrote: > I did not look for all bugs patched since 1.7.0 was released; I was just > replying to people who had commented on this thread explicitly asking for > certain things. I do not intend to pull in any commits other than what wa= s > explicitly requested. > > Andy LoPresto > alopresto@apache.org > *alopresto.apache@gmail.com * > PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > > On Jul 9, 2018, at 6:38 PM, Matt Burgess wrote: > > This Jira search [1] for Bugs resolved in 1.8.0 has 10 items, there > are some I don't see in this list (NIFI-5278 [2] and NIFI-5349 [3]), > should these all be included or on a case-by-case basis? > > Thanks, > Matt > > [1] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-5394?jql=3Dproject%20%3D%20NIF= I%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%201.8.0%20and%20Type%20%3D%20Bug%20and%20resolut= ion%20%3D%20Fixed > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-5278 > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-5349 > On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 9:11 PM Andy LoPresto wrote= : > > > To clarify for everyone posting on this thread, 0.0.x releases are bug fi= x > releases only, and cannot introduce new features. We will release a 1.7.1 > version with the fix for NIFI-5370 (wildcard certificate issue in secure > cluster) but this release will not contain any new feature work. Currentl= y, > I have slated for it: > > * NIFI-5370 wildcard cert fix <- not yet merged; needs +1 > * NIFI-5377 stack overflow with circular reference <- not yet merged; > needs +1 > * NIFI-5316 bug in FetchParquet > * NIFI-5361 processors with active threads do not run on restart > * NIFI-5362 suppress error message on successful processor termination > > Not addressed: > > * NIFI-5331 poisoned journal requires restart <- no work done on this tha= t > I see > * NIFI-5368 transitive controller services not validated by mock runner <= - > no work done on this that I see > * Docker improvements > * NIFI-5334 GetMongo passing NiFi flowfile attributes > > > Andy LoPresto > alopresto@apache.org > alopresto.apache@gmail.com > PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > > On Jul 9, 2018, at 12:21 PM, Ryan Hendrickson < > ryan.andrew.hendrickson@gmail.com> wrote: > > Ahh gotcha, and good point on grabbing the master. I may do that... > > Thanks, > Ryan > > On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 3:18 PM Andy LoPresto wrote= : > > Hi Ryan, > > That sounds like a separate discussion the community should weigh in on. > Right now, the release management process is fairly extensive and takes a > few days of manual work to perform. In addition, releases need to be vote= d > on by the community in order to be released, so this is an effort for > community members as well. > > I=E2=80=99m not opposed to improving our RM process to make this work eas= ier, but > it=E2=80=99s not as simple as just cutting a release more frequently at t= his point > in time. If you so desire, you can always checkout the current master or > specific feature branches. It=E2=80=99s possible we could do something li= ke a > nightly tag, but officially releasing that through the Apache process is > probably not doable in the near-term. > > The semantic versioning is also an issue, because 1.6.x releases are > supposed to be bug fixes only, not feature releases [1]. > > For the public API the Apache NiFi project aims to follow versioning > principles as described at Semantic Versioning 2.0.0 > > Consider the following scenarios in the context of the most recent > 'example' release being 0.0.1 and with the understanding that these are > about the public API as defined above. > > - For releases which are comprised solely of bug fixes or non-feature > introducing or enhancing changes that requires only a 'patch' version bu= mp > (the Z part in X.Y.Z). So the next release then is 0.0.2. > - For releases which include backward compatible changes to introduce > feature enhancements or new features that requires a 'minor' version > change > and the 'patch' version resets to '0' (the Y part in X.Y.0). So the nex= t > release then is 0.1.0. A 'minor' version change is also required for any > change that could result in an existing flow becoming invalid, such as t= he > addition of a required property with no default or the addition of a > relationship, or the removal of a property or relationship. Note: it is > *NOT* acceptable in a 'minor' version to change anything that can > result in an existing flow behaving differently (other than a component > becoming invalid). Doing so would fundamentally alter the way in which > organizations process data without them realizing it. > - For releases which include non-backward compatible changes or > changes deemed so substantive by the community that it is considered a > 'major' version change and the minor and patch versions reset to '0' (th= e > X > part in X.0.0). So the next release then is 1.0.0. > > After a release occurs the 'patch' version will be automatically adjusted > by maven without the release manager doing anything special. So rarely > will this value need to be manually set. In the event of a 'major' or > 'minor' bump though the entire relevant source tree will need to be > adjusted. > > > > [1] > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFI/Version+Scheme+and+API+C= ompatibility > > Andy LoPresto > alopresto@apache.org > *alopresto.apache@gmail.com * > PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > > On Jul 9, 2018, at 12:11 PM, Ryan Hendrickson < > ryan.andrew.hendrickson@gmail.com> wrote: > > As a user of NiFi, and someone converting things to use more standard > processors, vs writing custom ones, I'd prefer smaller releases, or > possible a release that only updates Processors with the bug fixes and > improvements that went into them vs having to diff the configuration file= s > each upgrade. The bigger releases, like 1.6.0 (163 updates), and 1.7.0 > (191 updates) are great, but the waiting game for fixes to go into a > release seems long. I'd love a weekly release, or even just know that on= ce > a month there will be a 1.6.x release coming out with updates to > processors. > > That said, I can't wait for this fix, slated for 1.8.0: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-5334 (GetMongo should pass > along NiFi FlowFile Attributes), love to see it in a 1.7.1. > > Ryan > > On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 10:55 AM Mike Thomsen > wrote: > > Aldrin and I got some Docker improvements in lately that might be good to > throw in as well. They can definitely wait until 1.8 if everyone wants to > KISS this release, but they could also add some real value for the docker > users too. > > On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 1:31 AM V, Prashanth (Nokia - IN/Bangalore) < > prashanth.v@nokia.com> wrote: > > Thanks Andy.. +1 for 1.7.1 release. > > Thanks & Regards, > Prashanth > > From: Andy LoPresto [mailto:alopresto@apache.org ] > Sent: Friday, July 06, 2018 1:34 AM > To: dev@nifi.apache.org > Subject: Re: [discuss] should we do a nifi 1.7.1 release? > > I=E2=80=99m working on the wildcard cert issue and would be able to put t= hat > > along > > with some other minor fixes into a 1.7.1 release. > > Andy LoPresto > alopresto@apache.org> > alopresto.apache@gmail.com > > PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > > On Jul 5, 2018, at 11:01 AM, Robert R. Bruno rbruno8@gmail.com>> wrote: > > +1 as well. Any chance of this one as well? > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-5316 > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2018, 11:33 Mark Bean mark.o.bean@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > +1 for a 1.7.1 release if it contains a fix for NIFI-5368 [1]. This bug > > is > > breaking multiple unit tests on custom processors. > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-5368 > > > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 12:23 PM Joe Witt joe.witt@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > team, > > Wanted to kick off a thread to suggest we do a nifi 1.7.1 release. It > sounds like we might have an issue handling wildcard certs in 1.7.0 > [1] and it was reported again in an email today i think. Also, if > this one is deemed legit it seems worth sorting out [2]. I'd imagine > there are a few other bug fixes as well we can pull in. > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-5370 > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-5377 > > Thanks > Joe > > > > --0000000000001448650570a6e05b--