I've noticed an issue with the per-instance class loading capability introduced in NIFI-2909 where the additional classpath resources can get incorrectly removed from the class loader.
I was able to reproduced this with a unit test and have a fix ready. I believe this is important and needs to go in for the 1.1 release, going to re-open NIFI-2909 and submit a PR shortly. -Bryan On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:11 AM, Matt Gilman <matt.c.gil...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have two items that I would like to wrap up prior to creating an RC for > 1.1.0. NIFI-2949 addresses some UX issues around Remote Process Group port > configuration. The work is already completed and I will be reviewing it > this today. Additionally, following recent interest on the mailing list, > I'd like to knock out NIFI-3020. This will allow an admin to configure a > strategy for user identity when logging in via LDAP. Specifically, it will > support usage of the DN (the default and current implementation) as well as > the username the user logged in as. I should be able to have a PR up for > this work later today. > > Thanks! > > Matt > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-2949 > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-3020 > > > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 8:00 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > The code is within the twitter4j library itself. I filed a request to > > twitter4jg. The most likely case is we will need to submit a PR to them. > > However, I don't see this as something that should delay the release. We > > can provide instructions for folks wanting to use the processor during > the > > time we cannot make it available in a convenient manner. I will provide > a > > meaningful comment about this in release notes and pointers on what folks > > can do in the meantime. > > > > On Nov 15, 2016 7:41 PM, "Andy LoPresto" <alopre...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > I understand there was a discussion thread within the NiFi community > for > > > this as well and I missed responding to that at that time. It just > seems > > to > > > me like JSON processing is necessary for GetTwitter, which is > incredibly > > > useful for demonstrating NiFi’s ability to read from a high volume > stream > > > out of the box. With NIFI-3019 (Remove GetTwitter from default build), > is > > > there any related effort to substitute an acceptable replacement JSON > > > library to restore this functionality? > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-3019 > > > > > > Andy LoPresto > > > alopre...@apache.org > > > *alopresto.apa...@gmail.com <alopresto.apa...@gmail.com>* > > > PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > > > > > > On Nov 15, 2016, at 4:36 PM, Andy LoPresto <alopre...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > > I’m working with Bryan Rosander to close out NIFI-3024, NIFI-2655, and > > > NIFI-2653. I believe Matt Burgess is working on NIFI-3011 and we > > > investigated some alternate TLS config options for the new version of > the > > > client library. > > > > > > Is there any alternative to excluding the GetTwitter processor? Using > > > Johnzon [1] or the Android re-implementation [2] discussed in the > mailing > > > list thread? > > > > > > [1] https://johnzon.apache.org/ > > > [2] https://developer.android.com/reference/org/json/package- > > summary.html > > > > > > > > > Andy LoPresto > > > alopre...@apache.org > > > *alopresto.apa...@gmail.com <alopresto.apa...@gmail.com>* > > > PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > > > > > > On Nov 15, 2016, at 3:58 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Team > > > > > > Very happy to see that we are down to three items remaining tagged to > > > 1.1.0. Solid effort over the recent weeks to close the gap including > > work > > > to get past the now category x Jason dependency we had. The most > notable > > > impact from that is the wildly popular GetTwitter processor, the fav > new > > > nifi user and demo processor, can no longer be included in the default > > > build. It is optionally available if users choose to build and use it > > but > > > we won't distribute binaries that have it. > > > > > > I see some review movement on some patch available but untagged items. > > > > > > I plan to kick off the 1.1.0 rc work soon. Perhaps Thurs or Fri. Anyone > > > have any outstanding items? > > > > > > Thanks > > > Joe > > > > > > On Nov 8, 2016 2:12 PM, "Joe Witt" <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Ryan > > > > > > Not officially but I think we should try to close this thing out and > > > start a vote in the next week or two at most. > > > > > > I'm going through the tickets again now. There is also a new issue of > > > the json-p license falling out of favor in Apache legal terms and > > > becoming Category-X. Am looking into that now. > > > > > > Thanks > > > Joe > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Ryan Ward <ryan.wa...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > Joe - Is there a target date for 1.1? > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Team, > > > > > > Just an update on things with working toward an Apache NiFi 1.1.0 > > > release. There are still about 33 JIRAs there now and some are > > > awaiting review and are some are under active progress. Yet there is > > > good traction and progress. I think we should just stay vigilant with > > > what makes it in and keep working it down. So let's please shoot for > > > a couple weeks from now. If it is ready sooner I'll jump on it. > > > > > > Thanks > > > Joe > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Team, > > > > > > There are 31 open JIRAs at present tagged to Apache NiFi 1.1.0. Let's > > > avoiding putting more in there for now at least without a discussion. > > > Of the 31 JIRAs there the vast majority need review so we should be > > > able to close these down fairly quickly as long as we don't let the > > > list grow. > > > > > > Thanks > > > joe > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Edgardo Vega <edgardo.v...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > Joe, > > > > > > Appreciate the offer it isn't my PR. I was just using it as an > > > > > > example. > > > > > > All > > > > > > mine are currently closed, which I greatly appreciate. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Edgardo > > > > > > On Friday, October 14, 2016, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Edgardo, > > > > > > You mentioned a PR from August. I'd be happy to help you work that > > > through review. > > > > > > Thanks > > > Joe > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Edgardo Vega < > > > > > > edgardo.v...@gmail.com > > > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > > > I have agreed that at this point a release is important. My goal > > > > > > was > > > > > > try > > > > > > to > > > > > > squeeze in a much goodness as possible into the release, but the > > > > > > important > > > > > > bug fixes should come first. Getting 1.x into a state where the > > > > > > release > > > > > > notes don't say that it is geared toward developers and testers is > > > > > > really > > > > > > huge. > > > > > > I think Nifi is a great community otherwise I would participate in > > > > > > the > > > > > > mailing list, create Jira tickets and pull requests. I am only > > > > > > trying to > > > > > > strengthen the great thing that is going on here. We can always do > > > > > > better. > > > > > > I was not trying to put down this community only to participate and > > > > > > make > > > > > > it > > > > > > better. I think this conversation is an indication of how great > > > > > > this > > > > > > community is. > > > > > > Maybe I am being sensitive about this issue and trying to > > > > > > strengthen > > > > > > the > > > > > > nifi community even more, after coming from a conference where it > > > > > > was > > > > > > reported there was lots of excitement at first and now the > > > > > > participation > > > > > > in > > > > > > the community has really died down and they are struggling. I don't > > > > > > want > > > > > > to > > > > > > see that happen here. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Edgardo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:37 AM, Andre <andre-li...@fucs.org > > > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Edgardo, > > > > > > Thank you for your feedback. We hear your comments and as a > > > > > > committer I > > > > > > can > > > > > > share we are constantly looking to improve the PR process, having > > > > > > already > > > > > > taken many of the steps you suggest. > > > > > > However, it is important to notice that the number of PRs should > > > > > > not be > > > > > > seen as a metric of engagement by the development community: Most > > > > > > of us > > > > > > will submit PRs so that our work can be carefully reviewed by our > > > > > > peers > > > > > > and > > > > > > some of us will use JIRA patches to provide contributions. > > > > > > Having said that, it is true that some PRs may sit idle for a long > > > > > > time > > > > > > and > > > > > > we are working to improve this pipeline. > > > > > > It was therefore no coincidence that I browsed most of the PRs > > > > > > performing > > > > > > a triage of items that have been superseded or diverged from the > > > > > > current > > > > > > code base. > > > > > > In fact, less than a month ago the dev team closed a number of > > > > > > stalled > > > > > > and > > > > > > superseded PRs (commit cc5e827aa1dfe2f376e9836380ba63c15269eea8). > > > > > > Despite all the above, I think Joe has a point. The master > > > > > > contain a > > > > > > series > > > > > > of important bug fixes and suspect the community would benefit > > > > > > from > > > > > > a > > > > > > release sooner rather than later. > > > > > > Once again, thank you for your feedback and contribution. It is > > > > > > good to > > > > > > have you here. > > > > > > Andre > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Edgardo Vega < > > > > > > edgardo.v...@gmail.com > > > > > > <javascript:;>> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > Joe - You are correct I was mentioning the PRs that are > > > > > > currently > > > > > > open. > > > > > > > > > Regardless of how it happens reducing the count of open PRs I > > > > > > believe > > > > > > to > > > > > > be > > > > > > extremely important. Maybe I was hoping that the release could > > > > > > be > > > > > > a > > > > > > forcing > > > > > > function to make that happen. I believe that developers are more > > > > > > willing > > > > > > to > > > > > > contribute when they see that their PRs will actually be able > > > > > > accepted > > > > > > and > > > > > > merged into the code base. Having a low number of open PRs in > > > > > > progress > > > > > > is a > > > > > > great indication that the main nifi developers are fully engaged > > > > > > with > > > > > > the > > > > > > community. > > > > > > There are a few PRs that don't have any comments from committers > > > > > > at > > > > > > all. > > > > > > I > > > > > > found one from August in that state. If that was my PR I don't > > > > > > think I > > > > > > would be so willing to put another one in anytime soon. I do get > > > > > > that > > > > > > sometime PRs get stalled by the originator, if so maybe a rule > > > > > > about > > > > > > closing them after a certain amount of time or being taken over > > > > > > by a > > > > > > core > > > > > > contributor if they think it worthwhile. > > > > > > I would like to shoutout to James Wing on my last PR he was > > > > > > quick > > > > > > to > > > > > > review, provided great comments, testing, and even some > > > > > > additional > > > > > > code. > > > > > > It > > > > > > was a great PR experience. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Edgardo > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Joe Percivall < > > > > > > joeperciv...@yahoo.com <javascript:;>. > > > > > > invalid> wrote: > > > > > > Joe, I think you misread. Edgardo is referring to the Pull > > > > > > Requests > > > > > > that > > > > > > are currently open, not the tickets assigned to the 1.1.0 > > > > > > version. > > > > > > > > > I think these goals (releasing 1.1.0 and cutting down the PR > > > > > > count) > > > > > > should > > > > > > be two different efforts. Doing a thorough job reviewing > > > > > > takes a > > > > > > significant amount of time from both the reviewer and > > > > > > contributor. > > > > > > In > > > > > > order > > > > > > to cut it down significantly would take much longer than a > > > > > > couple > > > > > > days. > > > > > > > > > Also there has already been a lot of great new features and > > > > > > bug > > > > > > fixes > > > > > > contributed to the 1.X line and I don't think it's worth > > > > > > holding up > > > > > > a > > > > > > 1.1.0 > > > > > > release for tickets not assigned to this fix version. As an > > > > > > added > > > > > > bonus > > > > > > though, I think many of the tickets tagged as 1.1.0 have PRs > > > > > > already > > > > > > open > > > > > > so closing those will make a large dent in the PR count. > > > > > > > > > Joe > > > > > > - - - - - - > > > Joseph Percivall > > > linkedin.com/in/Percivall > > > e: joeperciv...@yahoo.com <javascript:;> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, October 13, 2016 3:58 PM, Joe Witt < > > > > > > joe.w...@gmail.com > > > > > > <javascript:;>> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > There are less than 30 right now. Many of the roughly 90+ > > > > > > JIRAs > > > > > > opened on 1.1.0 were easily dispositioned to 1.2.0 or closed > > > > > > or > > > > > > just > > > > > > had fix versions removed. > > > > > > We will need to have a push over the next bunch of days to > > > > > > deal > > > > > > with > > > > > > reviewing/merging/moving the remaining items. > > > > > > Thanks > > > Joe > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Edgardo Vega < > > > > > > edgardo.v...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > Joe, > > > > > > There are 75 PRs currently open. Why not make a push over > > > > > > the > > > > > > next > > > > > > bunch > > > > > > of > > > > > > days to get them closed and then cut the release after that. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Edgardo > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Joe Witt < > > > > > > joe.w...@gmail.com > > > > > > <javascript:;>> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Team, > > > > > > There have been a ton of bugs fixed a few nice features. I > > > > > > would > > > > > > like > > > > > > to move to get Apache NiFi 1.1.0 release going pretty much > > > > > > based > > > > > > on > > > > > > where we are now and plan to move most tickets to a new > > > > > > Apache > > > > > > NiFi > > > > > > 1.2.0 version. We can try to get back on our roughly 6-8 > > > > > > week > > > > > > release > > > > > > schedule and shoot for a mid to late Nov release for NiFi > > > > > > 1.2.0 > > > > > > this > > > > > > way as well. Please advise if anyone has any other views on > > > > > > this. In > > > > > > the mean time I'll get the wheels in motion so you'll be > > > > > > seeing a > > > > > > lot > > > > > > of JIRA/issue updates to move version around. > > > > > > Thanks > > > Joe > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Tony Kurc < > > > > > > trk...@gmail.com > > > > > > <javascript:;>> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > Sounds good Joe. I have no issue to you doing the rm'ing > > > > > > for > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > On Oct 13, 2016 8:19 AM, "Joe Witt" <joe.w...@gmail.com > > > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Team, > > > > > > There are a lot of great fixes and improvements on the > > > > > > master > > > > > > line > > > > > > now > > > > > > and we're at a good time window to start pushing for a > > > > > > release. > > > > > > There > > > > > > are, however, about 90+ JIRAs assigned to 1.1.0 which > > > > > > are > > > > > > open. > > > > > > I'm > > > > > > going to go through them and remove fix versions where > > > > > > appropriate. > > > > > > > > > I'm happy to take on RM task for this release though if > > > > > > someone > > > > > > else > > > > > > would like to take that on please advise. > > > > > > Thanks > > > Joe > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Edgardo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Edgardo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Edgardo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Edgardo > > > > > > Sent from Gmail Mobile > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
