Also, to answer Ricky's question about how to merge in the pull request once there is consensus...
There are multiple ways to do it, but I believe what a lot of PMC members do is the following: - Get a patch of the pull request by appending .patch to the end of the url - git am --signoff < foo.patch - git commit --allow-empty -m"This closes #___" - git push It may be as simple as clicking the merge button in github, but I haven't tried :) On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Aldrin Piri <aldrinp...@gmail.com> wrote: > We certainly follow the RTC process with NiFi. As Joe mentioned, as long as > there is a consensus plus one, then you can push. > > I will put this on my plate to scope out at some point today and get you > the review so you can give your new credentials some usage. > > Thanks! > > --aldrin > > > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 10:27 AM, Alan Jackoway <al...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > > I am not a committer, but I think that at a minimum another committer > > should sign off on it. I don't mind if a different committer says "looks > > good to me, you can merge that," but I don't think committers should put > > their own code in without sign off. > > > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Oleg Zhurakousky < > > ozhurakou...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > > > > > May I suggest something that works so well in multitude of projects - > one > > > must never merge its own PR, essentially ensuring that there is a > > consensus > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > > > On Nov 3, 2015, at 09:00, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Ricky, > > > > > > > > Might I remind you, Sir, that you have the power to push! :-) > > > > > > > > Let's make sure all the deps are understood (how large?) and that > > > > licensing is fully accounted for. As long as you have a good plus > one > > > > and we're sure its good let's push. Happy to work with you on it. > > > > > > > > Also be sure to move the ticket to the 040 release. Do you have > > > > privileges for that already? > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Joe > > > > > > > >> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Ricky Saltzer <ri...@cloudera.com> > > > wrote: > > > >> Big +1 for these features! I have a pull request out right now for > > > adding a > > > >> Riemann processor <https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/91>. I've > been > > > using > > > >> it on our internal cluster for the past few weeks without any > issues, > > > so it > > > >> might be worth taking one last look and then possibly merge in for > the > > > >> release on the 19th. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 7:34 AM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> Team, > > > >>> > > > >>> As we work toward an 0.4.0 release here are the current highlights > > > >>> I've captured from the current and resolved tickets. I might have > > > >>> missed key points but these seem (to me) like the major points: > > > >>> > > > >>> Version 0.4.0 > > > >>> > > > >>> Highlights of the 0.4.0 release include: > > > >>> - Added proper support for tailing log files. > > > >>> - Updated the framework/UX to support new authentication mechanisms > > > >>> based on username/password > > > >>> - New processor to support Python/Jython scripts as processors. > > > >>> - New processors to capture syslog data received via UDP/TCP > > > >>> - Improved behavior of Execute and Put SQL processors > > > >>> - Provided documentation to help the 'Getting Started' process > > > >>> - Improved efficiency and file handling for merges/sessions dealing > > > >>> with 1000s of objects > > > >>> - New processors to List and Fetch data via SFTP > > > >>> - Improved Kerberos ticket re-registration for HDFS processors > > > >>> - Added processors to interact with Couchbase > > > >>> - Increased convenience when searching for provenance events of a > > > >>> given component > > > >>> - Added SSL support to JMS processors > > > >>> > > > >>> Now, we have many outstanding tickets still assigned to 0.4.0 which > > > >>> are unresolved. I reassigned many but still many remain. Please > do > > a > > > >>> scan through if you reported them and see which ones can be moved > off > > > >>> of 040. > > > >>> > > > >>> We released 0.3.0 on Sep 19th. I suggest we try to target Nov 19th > > > >>> then for 0.4.0. There is already quite a lot in this and so I > think > > > >>> we should get very specific about the items remaining which really > > > >>> must be in 040 vs which we can push forward. > > > >>> > > > >>> I'll keep pairing down the tickets on 040 and pinging folks to > > > >>> understand likely target dates for completion. > > > >>> > > > >>> Thanks > > > >>> Joe > > > >>> > > > >>>> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >>>> The current process is outlined in our release guide. But the > main > > > idea > > > >>> is > > > >>>> that all who wish to participate in release validation do so from > > the > > > RC. > > > >>>> Unit tests are of course run by the builds but we rely on people > > > power to > > > >>>> verify system level testing and that is part of that testing folks > > > should > > > >>>> do. We obviously can't test all the things and environments and > so > > on > > > >>> with > > > >>>> this model. The more CI we can get established the better we can > > do. > > > >>> But > > > >>>> we have much room for improvement in validating releases. > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> On Nov 2, 2015 10:00 AM, "Rick Braddy" <rbra...@softnas.com> > > wrote: > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Joe, > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> This reminds me... are there any entry or exit criteria (from a > > > defects > > > >>>>> perspective) established for NiFi releases? In other words, what > > is > > > the > > > >>>>> criteria for determining when the code is ready for release and > > > >>> production > > > >>>>> use? > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Thanks > > > >>>>> Rick > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > > > >>>>> From: Joe Witt [mailto:joe.w...@gmail.com] > > > >>>>> Sent: Monday, November 02, 2015 8:56 AM > > > >>>>> To: dev@nifi.apache.org > > > >>>>> Subject: Re: Next release? > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Team...we def need to address or move a good bit of ticketage to > > move > > > >>>>> towards an RC. It isn't critical we do it 'now' but we should > > strive > > > >>> for 6 > > > >>>>> to 8 week release cycles in my view. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> We should also decouple the framework/app releases from those of > > > >>>>> processors in my view but we can kick off another thread for > > > discussion > > > >>>>> there. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Thanks > > > >>>>> Joe > > > >>>>>> On Oct 29, 2015 11:50 AM, "Joe Witt" <joe.w...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> mike - that is good to know. Look forward to seeing the ticket. > > If > > > >>>>>> you can put the thread dumps up that would obviously be awesome > > > though > > > >>>>>> I recognize why that is non-trivial. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Thanks > > > >>>>>> Joe > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Michael Moser < > > moser...@gmail.com > > > > > > > >>>>>> wrote: > > > >>>>>>> All, > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> On an extremely busy cluster that I work with, I've noticed > some > > > >>>>>>> thread starvation issues on the NCM. It manifests as the > > "spinning > > > >>>>>>> wheel of death" when refreshing the NiFi UI. Thread and heap > > dumps > > > >>>>>>> point to the WebClusterManager in the framework. I've made some > > > >>>>>>> small quick-win > > > >>>>>> changes > > > >>>>>>> that I'm testing now, but would appreciate feedback from the > > > >>>>>>> community. > > > >>>>>> I > > > >>>>>>> will write up a ticket shortly that explains it, but would like > > to > > > >>>>>>> see it in 0.4.0 if reviewers agree with the changes. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> Thanks, > > > >>>>>>> -- Mike > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com > > > > > >>> wrote: > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> I haven't done it in a while. Am happy to take it. We need > to > > > >>>>>>>> scrub > > > >>>>>> the > > > >>>>>>>> items assigned to 040 and pick our must haves ... > > > >>>>>>>> On Oct 29, 2015 9:20 AM, "Sean Busbey" <bus...@cloudera.com> > > > >>> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> Hi Folks! > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> Tomorrow marks 6 weeks since the 0.3.0 release. Any one up > for > > > >>>>>>>>> starting a release candidate? > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> -- > > > >>>>>>>>> Sean > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> -- > > > >> Ricky Saltzer > > > >> http://www.cloudera.com > > > > > > > > > >
