Does anyone object to Joe Skora being release manager for 0.7.1? Based on this [1] I don't see any reason he shouldn't be able to. I've offered out of band to assist.
1. http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html#release_manager On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Tony Kurc <trk...@gmail.com> wrote: > Well I'm certainly willing to not do it! That being said, I don't know > that we've had a non-PMC member do the job of RM'ing (I tried to find logs > of it all, and failed). > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Joe Skora <jsk...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I'm willing take a try at RM or work with someone to understand it in the >> future. >> >> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Tony Kurc <trk...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Awesome. I propose we start building a release candidate off of >> > 40618364e70a966f9c1e425674b53b22b1fb0fb0 soon. >> > >> > I believe I was the sole volunteer to RM, and unless I hear otherwise, I >> > presume I will be doing so. I'd like to give the commit at least a good >> 24 >> > hours for some people to bang on it before I start pulling together an >> RC. >> > >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:30 AM, Michael Moser <moser...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > 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...@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" <trk...@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...@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.w...@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...@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 <trk...@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.w...@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 < >> > b...@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 < >> > trk...@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...@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 >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > > >> > >> >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >
