Tomorrow I will update the documentation for NIFI-655 and let the PR commence. While that is ongoing I'll cycle back to testing this configuration.
Matt Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 24, 2015, at 10:44 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > For 1198 and 1203 those should be included. Those are the sorts of > things we're going to be finding/fixing in the testing phase anyway. > Also, since they're impacting an as of yet unreleased feature we > really need the multiple eyes on testing which is how these were > found. > > For NIFI-655 why not simply document that it is an untested > configuration and move forward? > > Thanks > Joe > >> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Matt Gilman <matt.c.gil...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> These tickets [1][2] address the incorrect validation errors we were seeing >> for processors that include the Input Required annotation. These were bugs >> that slipped through the NIFI-810 the review. Would be good to include if >> possible but I understand we need to draw the line somewhere. >> >> As for NIFI-655, I've been struggling getting an LDAP server stood up that >> uses 2 way SSL. Hopefully we can get that squared away soon and wrap this >> one up. :) >> >> Matt >> >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1198 >> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1203 >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On Nov 24, 2015, at 10:23 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Given the testing to NIFI-1192 and review of NIFI-631 done already >>> both are lower risk I think. >>> >>> NIFI-1107 seems very useful and helpful but we do need to be careful >>> given that we know this one is already in use and this is a >>> substantive change. >>> >>> If there are folks that can dig into review/testing of NIFI-1107 that >>> would be great. Waiting for word on NIFI-655 readiness then I think >>> we should go cold and just focus on testing an RC. >>> >>> Thanks >>> Joe >>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Tony Kurc <trk...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Agreed. I know there has already been a good deal of discussion about >>>> design on all these. >>>> >>>>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 4:14 PM, Aldrin Piri <aldrinp...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> No qualms here. If they look good to go while the work and testing >>>>> surrounding NIFI-655 wraps up, they might as well be included. Would not >>>>> want to delay the release should any of these become protracted in terms >>>>> of >>>>> iterations. >>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Tony Kurc <trk...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> All, >>>>>> I was reviewing github PRs and wondering whether anyone objected to >>>>>> slipping a couple that look like they're very close into 0.4.0. >>>>>> >>>>>> NIFI-1192 (#131) >>>>>> NIFI-631 (#113) >>>>>> NIFI-1107 (#192) >>>>>> >>>>>> I should have some review cycles tonight. Lots of comments on them all, >>>>> and >>>>>> have good "momentum". >>>>>> >>>>>> Tony >>>>>
