To clarify for everyone posting on this thread, 0.0.x releases are bug fix 
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. Currently, 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 that 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
alopre...@apache.org
alopresto.apa...@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.hendrick...@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 <alopre...@apache.org 
> <mailto:alopre...@apache.org>> 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 voted
>> on by the community in order to be released, so this is an effort for
>> community members as well.
>> 
>> I’m not opposed to improving our RM process to make this work easier, but
>> it’s not as simple as just cutting a release more frequently at this point
>> in time. If you so desire, you can always checkout the current master or
>> specific feature branches. It’s possible we could do something like 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 <http://semver.org/ 
>> <http://semver.org/>>
>> 
>> 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 bump
>>   (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 next
>>   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 the
>>   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' (the 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+Compatibility
>>  
>> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFI/Version+Scheme+and+API+Compatibility>
>> 
>> Andy LoPresto
>> alopre...@apache.org <mailto:alopre...@apache.org>
>> *alopresto.apa...@gmail.com <mailto:alopresto.apa...@gmail.com> 
>> <alopresto.apa...@gmail.com <mailto:alopresto.apa...@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.hendrick...@gmail.com 
>> <mailto:ryan.andrew.hendrick...@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 files
>> 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 once
>> 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 
>> <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 <mikerthom...@gmail.com 
>> <mailto:mikerthom...@gmail.com>>
>> 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) <
>> prashant...@nokia.com <mailto:prashant...@nokia.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Thanks Andy..  +1 for 1.7.1 release.
>> 
>> Thanks & Regards,
>> Prashanth
>> 
>> From: Andy LoPresto [mailto:alopre...@apache.org 
>> <mailto:alopre...@apache.org> <alopre...@apache.org 
>> <mailto:alopre...@apache.org>>]
>> Sent: Friday, July 06, 2018 1:34 AM
>> To: dev@nifi.apache.org <mailto:dev@nifi.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: [discuss] should we do a nifi 1.7.1 release?
>> 
>> I’m working on the wildcard cert issue and would be able to put that
>> 
>> along
>> 
>> with some other minor fixes into a 1.7.1 release.
>> 
>> Andy LoPresto
>> alopre...@apache.org 
>> <mailto:alopre...@apache.org><mailto:alopre...@apache.org 
>> <mailto:alopre...@apache.org> <alopre...@apache.org 
>> <mailto:alopre...@apache.org>>>
>> alopresto.apa...@gmail.com 
>> <mailto:alopresto.apa...@gmail.com><mailto:alopresto.apa...@gmail.com 
>> <mailto:alopresto.apa...@gmail.com>
>> <alopresto.apa...@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 <rbru...@gmail.com<mailto:
>> rbru...@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.b...@gmail.com<mailto:
>> mark.o.b...@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.w...@gmail.com<mailto:
>> joe.w...@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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Reply via email to