They work for me, perhaps there was a connectivity issue or something?
On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Anil Rai wrote:
> The below links does not work. Have they moved somewhere else?
>
>
I mean on the connection label itself not on the path which bends it.
Specifically, I observed this behavior on the relationships that are routed
back to the same processor.
-Original Message-
From: Joe Witt [mailto:joe.w...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2018 12:46 PM
To:
Double-clicking on the connection label should open the connection
configuration dialog. Double-clicking on the actual path will generate a
bend point. The connection label can then be attached to any bend point.
Matt
On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 2:02 PM, Karthik Kothareddy (karthikk) [CONT - Type
2]
There is no notion of a 'failure queue' versus any other queue.
Processors have named relationships that once connected to another
thing forms a connection. They have no special meaning.
So, you're saying that some connections you double click bring up the
dialogue and others do not respond to a
All,
I am using 1.4.0 and I see that double-click to configure (for both queues and
processors) feature as very useful and intuitive to use. However, if I double
click on a queue which has a failure relationship it doesn't work as expected
and I have to right-click to configure it. Is this by
Thanks for reaching out Charlie. If you wanted to submit a PR for this, I
would be happy to review/merge it for you.
Matt
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:34 PM, Charlie Meyer <
charlie.me...@civitaslearning.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I opened up https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-4835 earlier
The below links does not work. Have they moved somewhere else?
https://bryanbende.com/development/2016/08/17/apache-nifi-1-0-0-authorization-and-multi-tenancy
https://blog.rosander.ninja/nifi/toolkit/tls/2016/09/19/tls-toolkit-intro.html
https://blog.rosander.ninja/nifi/toolkit/tls/2016/
I agree with Andy on the Docker point, I think it could be too high a
barrier for contribution in some cases. However I think we can build
out / extend a "new component" section of the PR template that has
more best practices, recommendations, suggestions.
I like the idea of the reviewer
Thanks Andy. It did resolve my issue. I got it working.
Thanks again for all the links. Very helpful.
Cheers
Anil
On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 10:14 AM, Andy LoPresto wrote:
> Hi Anil,
>
> In addition to Bryan’s explanation, there are a number of blog posts and
> articles
Mike,
I think that would be awesome for reviewers (and that is where most of my time
is spent on the review side), but I also think that sets a really high bar for
contribution. Many of the users who submit pull requests are first-time
contributors or new to the project, and I believe the
Hi Anil,
In addition to Bryan’s explanation, there are a number of blog posts and
articles covering this topic:
* Authorization and Multi-Tenancy by Bryan Bende [1]
* Secured Cluster Setup by Pierre Villard [2]
* TLS Generation Toolkit section of Apache NiFi Admin Guide [3]
* Initial Admin
Hi Anil,
In addition to Bryan’s explanation, there are a number of blog posts and
articles covering this topic:
* Authorization and Multi-Tenancy by Bryan Bende [1]
* Secured Cluster Setup by Pierre Villard [2]
* TLS Generation Toolkit section of Apache NiFi Admin Guide [3]
* Initial Admin
Hi Anil,
In addition to Bryan’s explanation, there are a number of blog posts and
articles covering this topic:
* Authorization and Multi-Tenancy by Bryan Bende [1]
* Secured Cluster Setup by Pierre Villard [2]
* TLS Generation Toolkit section of Apache NiFi Admin Guide [3]
* Initial Admin
It looks like there are at least 10 new processors and services in the
backlog, and quite a few modifications to existing ones.
Something I think would really help here is to expand the scope of
requirements for submitting a new processor for code review to include:
1. docker-compose file that
14 matches
Mail list logo