Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
Thanks, we’re now up to 4 backward-incompatible issues. Any others should be so marked? On 4/17/17, 4:43 PM, "Matt Foley" wrote: Hi all, Out of the 58 Jiras resolved, completely or partially, between 0.3.1 and 0.4.0, only one is labeled “backward-incompatible” and has text in the “Docs Text” field. And it’s super minor (METRON-771). Is this really true? If so, great, but if not, please help people upgrade without glitches: Fix these fields in your jiras, so they can be included in the Release Notes. a) In the “Labels” field, add “backward-incompatible”. (It will autocomplete for you.) b) In the “Doc Text” field, say what the issue is and what a person upgrading should do about it, if anything. As usual, non-response will be considered positive confirmation that no response is necessary :-) Please try to address in the next day or so. Thanks, Your humble Release Manager On 4/12/17, 10:59 AM, "zeo...@gmail.com" wrote: I agree conceptually but haven't looked at them each individually to see how much they impact and if a short timeline for merging is reasonable. METRON-821 just needs a minor change and then a final run-through before I'm comfortable merging it in. Jon On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:44 AM Nick Allen wrote: > It would be nice to close out all the "Kerberos" related PRs prior to the > release. Let me know if anyone thinks any of these are not feasible for > the release. > > To that end I went through and reviewed some of the outstanding ones below > to try and help move them along. Any others willing to help would be much > appreciated. > > METRON-836 Use Pycapa with Kerberos > #524 opened 18 hours ago by nickwallen > > METRON-835 Use Profiler with Kerberos > #521 opened 2 days ago by nickwalle > > METRON-833: Update MaaS documentation to explain how it interacts with > kerberos > #520 opened 5 days ago by cestella > > METRON-799: The MPack should function in a kerberized cluster > #518 opened 5 days ago by justinlee > > METRON-821 Minor fixes in full dev kerberos setup instructions > #510 opened 8 days ago by JonZeolla 4 of 4 > > METRON-819: Document kafka console producer parameter for sensors with > kerberos > #507 opened 9 days ago by mmiklavc 4 of 4 > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > > > Hi all, > > Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last release was finally > > published, that process started in January :-) > > Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s been a ton of > > really cool new stuff added since then: > > > > Biggest items: > > - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) > > - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) clusters (mult. > Jiras) > > > > Other major new features: > > - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window specification for Profiler > > - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt > > - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat Triage > > - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap > > - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler > > - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from HDFS (and huge > > speed-up for function resolution) > > - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and > > - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards > > - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar > > - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages > > - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout > > > > We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, and improvements to > > deployment tools (docker, ansible, mpack, quickdev, and fulldev). > > > > I think the REST API and Kerberization, by themselves, would justify a > > release. Along with the others, I’d like to propose that we make a > release > > soon. The time frame I had in mind was at the end of this week I could > cut > > a release branch (so on-going work in master doesn’t get blocked) and > start > > the process of generating an RC. > > > > What do you-all think? > > Also, what additional work do you think should be included in this > > release, and can it realistically get done by the end of this week? The > > time frame is, of course, flexible at the pleasure of the community – but > > also, there will be another release in another couple months or so,
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
Hi all, Out of the 58 Jiras resolved, completely or partially, between 0.3.1 and 0.4.0, only one is labeled “backward-incompatible” and has text in the “Docs Text” field. And it’s super minor (METRON-771). Is this really true? If so, great, but if not, please help people upgrade without glitches: Fix these fields in your jiras, so they can be included in the Release Notes. a) In the “Labels” field, add “backward-incompatible”. (It will autocomplete for you.) b) In the “Doc Text” field, say what the issue is and what a person upgrading should do about it, if anything. As usual, non-response will be considered positive confirmation that no response is necessary :-) Please try to address in the next day or so. Thanks, Your humble Release Manager On 4/12/17, 10:59 AM, "zeo...@gmail.com" wrote: I agree conceptually but haven't looked at them each individually to see how much they impact and if a short timeline for merging is reasonable. METRON-821 just needs a minor change and then a final run-through before I'm comfortable merging it in. Jon On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:44 AM Nick Allen wrote: > It would be nice to close out all the "Kerberos" related PRs prior to the > release. Let me know if anyone thinks any of these are not feasible for > the release. > > To that end I went through and reviewed some of the outstanding ones below > to try and help move them along. Any others willing to help would be much > appreciated. > > METRON-836 Use Pycapa with Kerberos > #524 opened 18 hours ago by nickwallen > > METRON-835 Use Profiler with Kerberos > #521 opened 2 days ago by nickwalle > > METRON-833: Update MaaS documentation to explain how it interacts with > kerberos > #520 opened 5 days ago by cestella > > METRON-799: The MPack should function in a kerberized cluster > #518 opened 5 days ago by justinlee > > METRON-821 Minor fixes in full dev kerberos setup instructions > #510 opened 8 days ago by JonZeolla 4 of 4 > > METRON-819: Document kafka console producer parameter for sensors with > kerberos > #507 opened 9 days ago by mmiklavc 4 of 4 > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > > > Hi all, > > Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last release was finally > > published, that process started in January :-) > > Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s been a ton of > > really cool new stuff added since then: > > > > Biggest items: > > - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) > > - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) clusters (mult. > Jiras) > > > > Other major new features: > > - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window specification for Profiler > > - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt > > - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat Triage > > - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap > > - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler > > - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from HDFS (and huge > > speed-up for function resolution) > > - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and > > - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards > > - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar > > - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages > > - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout > > > > We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, and improvements to > > deployment tools (docker, ansible, mpack, quickdev, and fulldev). > > > > I think the REST API and Kerberization, by themselves, would justify a > > release. Along with the others, I’d like to propose that we make a > release > > soon. The time frame I had in mind was at the end of this week I could > cut > > a release branch (so on-going work in master doesn’t get blocked) and > start > > the process of generating an RC. > > > > What do you-all think? > > Also, what additional work do you think should be included in this > > release, and can it realistically get done by the end of this week? The > > time frame is, of course, flexible at the pleasure of the community – but > > also, there will be another release in another couple months or so, so no > > need to rush stuff. > > > > Thanks, > > --Matt > > > > > > > -- Jon
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
I agree conceptually but haven't looked at them each individually to see how much they impact and if a short timeline for merging is reasonable. METRON-821 just needs a minor change and then a final run-through before I'm comfortable merging it in. Jon On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:44 AM Nick Allen wrote: > It would be nice to close out all the "Kerberos" related PRs prior to the > release. Let me know if anyone thinks any of these are not feasible for > the release. > > To that end I went through and reviewed some of the outstanding ones below > to try and help move them along. Any others willing to help would be much > appreciated. > > METRON-836 Use Pycapa with Kerberos > #524 opened 18 hours ago by nickwallen > > METRON-835 Use Profiler with Kerberos > #521 opened 2 days ago by nickwalle > > METRON-833: Update MaaS documentation to explain how it interacts with > kerberos > #520 opened 5 days ago by cestella > > METRON-799: The MPack should function in a kerberized cluster > #518 opened 5 days ago by justinlee > > METRON-821 Minor fixes in full dev kerberos setup instructions > #510 opened 8 days ago by JonZeolla 4 of 4 > > METRON-819: Document kafka console producer parameter for sensors with > kerberos > #507 opened 9 days ago by mmiklavc 4 of 4 > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > > > Hi all, > > Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last release was finally > > published, that process started in January :-) > > Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s been a ton of > > really cool new stuff added since then: > > > > Biggest items: > > - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) > > - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) clusters (mult. > Jiras) > > > > Other major new features: > > - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window specification for Profiler > > - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt > > - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat Triage > > - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap > > - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler > > - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from HDFS (and huge > > speed-up for function resolution) > > - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and > > - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards > > - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar > > - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages > > - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout > > > > We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, and improvements to > > deployment tools (docker, ansible, mpack, quickdev, and fulldev). > > > > I think the REST API and Kerberization, by themselves, would justify a > > release. Along with the others, I’d like to propose that we make a > release > > soon. The time frame I had in mind was at the end of this week I could > cut > > a release branch (so on-going work in master doesn’t get blocked) and > start > > the process of generating an RC. > > > > What do you-all think? > > Also, what additional work do you think should be included in this > > release, and can it realistically get done by the end of this week? The > > time frame is, of course, flexible at the pleasure of the community – but > > also, there will be another release in another couple months or so, so no > > need to rush stuff. > > > > Thanks, > > --Matt > > > > > > > -- Jon
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
It would be nice to close out all the "Kerberos" related PRs prior to the release. Let me know if anyone thinks any of these are not feasible for the release. To that end I went through and reviewed some of the outstanding ones below to try and help move them along. Any others willing to help would be much appreciated. METRON-836 Use Pycapa with Kerberos #524 opened 18 hours ago by nickwallen METRON-835 Use Profiler with Kerberos #521 opened 2 days ago by nickwalle METRON-833: Update MaaS documentation to explain how it interacts with kerberos #520 opened 5 days ago by cestella METRON-799: The MPack should function in a kerberized cluster #518 opened 5 days ago by justinlee METRON-821 Minor fixes in full dev kerberos setup instructions #510 opened 8 days ago by JonZeolla 4 of 4 METRON-819: Document kafka console producer parameter for sensors with kerberos #507 opened 9 days ago by mmiklavc 4 of 4 On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > Hi all, > Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last release was finally > published, that process started in January :-) > Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s been a ton of > really cool new stuff added since then: > > Biggest items: > - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) > - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) clusters (mult. Jiras) > > Other major new features: > - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window specification for Profiler > - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt > - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat Triage > - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap > - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler > - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from HDFS (and huge > speed-up for function resolution) > - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and > - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards > - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar > - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages > - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout > > We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, and improvements to > deployment tools (docker, ansible, mpack, quickdev, and fulldev). > > I think the REST API and Kerberization, by themselves, would justify a > release. Along with the others, I’d like to propose that we make a release > soon. The time frame I had in mind was at the end of this week I could cut > a release branch (so on-going work in master doesn’t get blocked) and start > the process of generating an RC. > > What do you-all think? > Also, what additional work do you think should be included in this > release, and can it realistically get done by the end of this week? The > time frame is, of course, flexible at the pleasure of the community – but > also, there will be another release in another couple months or so, so no > need to rush stuff. > > Thanks, > --Matt > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
+1 Jon On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 2:18 PM James Sirota wrote: > +1 on the plan. Thanks, Matt > > > 11.04.2017, 11:06, "Justin Leet" : > > +1 on the plan > > > > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Casey Stella > wrote: > > > >> +1 to 0.4.0 > >> > >> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Otto Fowler > >> wrote: > >> > >> > +1 > >> > > >> > > >> > On April 11, 2017 at 13:59:46, Matt Foley (ma...@apache.org) wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi all, > >> > Looks to me like the vast majority of the material mentioned below > has > >> been > >> > committed. There are still 8 recent PRs that need review and, > hopefully, > >> > commit. > >> > > >> > I’m going to go ahead and make a release branch, with the > understanding > >> > that any further commits (especially but not limited to > Kerberization, > >> > Metron-UI, Metron Management UI, or Mpack support), that come in > over the > >> > next 36 hours or so will still be included in the RC. > >> > > >> > Does that meet everyone’s needs? I want to get started because it > will > >> > probably take a day or more just to create the branch, an RC build, > and > >> > start the sanity testing. > >> > > >> > There’s enough major new stuff here that I’m going to call it 0.4.0. > Is > >> > that also okay with everyone? > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > --Matt > >> > > >> > On 4/5/17, 6:23 PM, "Ali Nazemian" wrote: > >> > > >> > Dear Metron Devs, > >> > > >> > As Metron users/customers, we are very keen to have all high priority > >> > related features/bugs to the Security as well as Metron-UI and Metron > >> > Management-UI. > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > Ali > >> > > >> > On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Ryan Merriman > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > > We just finished responding to the first round of feedback so I > don't > >> > think > >> > > we're that far away on METRON-623. > >> > > > >> > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Matt Foley > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Totally agree would be good to have MPack support. Let’s see how > it > >> > > > goes. Wouldn’t want to cut it out for the sake of a day or two. > >> > > > > >> > > > On 4/5/17, 1:14 PM, "Justin Leet" wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > I've made fairly good progress on > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-799 (The MPack > should > >> > > > function > >> > > > in a kerberized cluster). The PR itself might cut close to the > >> > > > deadline, > >> > > > and in particular might be tough to get reviewed in time. > >> > > > > >> > > > I'll do a best effort attempt to get it in to make our Kerberos > story > >> > > > more > >> > > > complete, but I'd say the release can go on without this (and we > use > >> > > > manual > >> > > > Kerberos in its absence). > >> > > > > >> > > > Justin > >> > > > > >> > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Matt Foley > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > Sure. To be clear, I wasn’t proposing an exclusive list, just > >> > > > making the > >> > > > > argument that there seemed to be enough to proceed with. Any > duly > >> > > > > committed content in the master branch, at the time we create > the > >> > > > first RC > >> > > > > (ie, some time after METRON-623 goes in, but not before Monday) > >> > > will > >> > > > surely > >> > > > > be included in the RC, unless something has a bug that can’t be > >> > > > readily > >> > > > > resolved. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks, > >> > > > > --Matt > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On 4/5/17, 12:56 PM, "David Lyle" > wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > I'm working on METRON-826 right now. I'll have a PR up today or > >> > > > > tomorrow at > >> > > > > the latest. I'd like to see it go as well. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-826 > >> > > > > > >> > > > > -D... > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Nick Allen >> > > > > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > I would like to include #509 with the Fastcapa improvements.. > >> > > > > Already have > >> > > > > > a +1. I'm just letting it soak giving others some time to > >> > > > review if > >> > > > > they > >> > > > > > feel so inclined. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-metron/pull/509 > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, James Sirota < > >> > > > jsir...@apache.org> > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I second this. I want to see 623 go in in addition to the > >> > > > > kerberos work. > >> > > > > > > When both are in I think it makes sense to do the release > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > 04.04.2017, 11:33, "Simon Elliston Ball" < > >> > > > > si...@simonellistonball.com>: > >> > > > > > > > I'd really like to see METRON-623 (the ui) get into the > >> > > > release. > >> > > > > It > >> > > > > > > feels like the current PR review is getting close, and that > >> > > > > getting it in > >> > > > > > > then focussing on foll
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
+1 on the plan. Thanks, Matt 11.04.2017, 11:06, "Justin Leet" : > +1 on the plan > > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Casey Stella wrote: > >> +1 to 0.4.0 >> >> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Otto Fowler >> wrote: >> >> > +1 >> > >> > >> > On April 11, 2017 at 13:59:46, Matt Foley (ma...@apache.org) wrote: >> > >> > Hi all, >> > Looks to me like the vast majority of the material mentioned below has >> been >> > committed. There are still 8 recent PRs that need review and, hopefully, >> > commit. >> > >> > I’m going to go ahead and make a release branch, with the understanding >> > that any further commits (especially but not limited to Kerberization, >> > Metron-UI, Metron Management UI, or Mpack support), that come in over the >> > next 36 hours or so will still be included in the RC. >> > >> > Does that meet everyone’s needs? I want to get started because it will >> > probably take a day or more just to create the branch, an RC build, and >> > start the sanity testing. >> > >> > There’s enough major new stuff here that I’m going to call it 0.4.0. Is >> > that also okay with everyone? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > --Matt >> > >> > On 4/5/17, 6:23 PM, "Ali Nazemian" wrote: >> > >> > Dear Metron Devs, >> > >> > As Metron users/customers, we are very keen to have all high priority >> > related features/bugs to the Security as well as Metron-UI and Metron >> > Management-UI. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Ali >> > >> > On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Ryan Merriman >> wrote: >> > >> > > We just finished responding to the first round of feedback so I don't >> > think >> > > we're that far away on METRON-623. >> > > >> > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Matt Foley wrote: >> > > >> > > > Totally agree would be good to have MPack support. Let’s see how it >> > > > goes. Wouldn’t want to cut it out for the sake of a day or two. >> > > > >> > > > On 4/5/17, 1:14 PM, "Justin Leet" wrote: >> > > > >> > > > I've made fairly good progress on >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-799 (The MPack should >> > > > function >> > > > in a kerberized cluster). The PR itself might cut close to the >> > > > deadline, >> > > > and in particular might be tough to get reviewed in time. >> > > > >> > > > I'll do a best effort attempt to get it in to make our Kerberos story >> > > > more >> > > > complete, but I'd say the release can go on without this (and we use >> > > > manual >> > > > Kerberos in its absence). >> > > > >> > > > Justin >> > > > >> > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Matt Foley wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > Sure. To be clear, I wasn’t proposing an exclusive list, just >> > > > making the >> > > > > argument that there seemed to be enough to proceed with. Any duly >> > > > > committed content in the master branch, at the time we create the >> > > > first RC >> > > > > (ie, some time after METRON-623 goes in, but not before Monday) >> > > will >> > > > surely >> > > > > be included in the RC, unless something has a bug that can’t be >> > > > readily >> > > > > resolved. >> > > > > >> > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > --Matt >> > > > > >> > > > > On 4/5/17, 12:56 PM, "David Lyle" wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > I'm working on METRON-826 right now. I'll have a PR up today or >> > > > > tomorrow at >> > > > > the latest. I'd like to see it go as well. >> > > > > >> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-826 >> > > > > >> > > > > -D... >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Nick Allen > > > > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > I would like to include #509 with the Fastcapa improvements.. >> > > > > Already have >> > > > > > a +1. I'm just letting it soak giving others some time to >> > > > review if >> > > > > they >> > > > > > feel so inclined. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-metron/pull/509 >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, James Sirota < >> > > > jsir...@apache.org> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > I second this. I want to see 623 go in in addition to the >> > > > > kerberos work. >> > > > > > > When both are in I think it makes sense to do the release >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > 04.04.2017, 11:33, "Simon Elliston Ball" < >> > > > > si...@simonellistonball.com>: >> > > > > > > > I'd really like to see METRON-623 (the ui) get into the >> > > > release. >> > > > > It >> > > > > > > feels like the current PR review is getting close, and that >> > > > > getting it in >> > > > > > > then focussing on follow on tasks in a separate release >> > > > would work >> > > > > well. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > I would be all for getting a release out if only for the >> > > > > Kerberos work. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Simon >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> On 4 Apr 2017, at 20:15, zeo...@gmail.com < >> > > > zeo...@gmail.com> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
+1 on the plan On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Casey Stella wrote: > +1 to 0.4.0 > > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Otto Fowler > wrote: > > > +1 > > > > > > On April 11, 2017 at 13:59:46, Matt Foley (ma...@apache.org) wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > Looks to me like the vast majority of the material mentioned below has > been > > committed. There are still 8 recent PRs that need review and, hopefully, > > commit. > > > > I’m going to go ahead and make a release branch, with the understanding > > that any further commits (especially but not limited to Kerberization, > > Metron-UI, Metron Management UI, or Mpack support), that come in over the > > next 36 hours or so will still be included in the RC. > > > > Does that meet everyone’s needs? I want to get started because it will > > probably take a day or more just to create the branch, an RC build, and > > start the sanity testing. > > > > There’s enough major new stuff here that I’m going to call it 0.4.0. Is > > that also okay with everyone? > > > > Thanks, > > --Matt > > > > On 4/5/17, 6:23 PM, "Ali Nazemian" wrote: > > > > Dear Metron Devs, > > > > As Metron users/customers, we are very keen to have all high priority > > related features/bugs to the Security as well as Metron-UI and Metron > > Management-UI. > > > > Thanks, > > Ali > > > > On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Ryan Merriman > wrote: > > > > > We just finished responding to the first round of feedback so I don't > > think > > > we're that far away on METRON-623. > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > > > > > > > Totally agree would be good to have MPack support. Let’s see how it > > > > goes. Wouldn’t want to cut it out for the sake of a day or two. > > > > > > > > On 4/5/17, 1:14 PM, "Justin Leet" wrote: > > > > > > > > I've made fairly good progress on > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-799 (The MPack should > > > > function > > > > in a kerberized cluster). The PR itself might cut close to the > > > > deadline, > > > > and in particular might be tough to get reviewed in time. > > > > > > > > I'll do a best effort attempt to get it in to make our Kerberos story > > > > more > > > > complete, but I'd say the release can go on without this (and we use > > > > manual > > > > Kerberos in its absence). > > > > > > > > Justin > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > > > > > > > > > Sure. To be clear, I wasn’t proposing an exclusive list, just > > > > making the > > > > > argument that there seemed to be enough to proceed with. Any duly > > > > > committed content in the master branch, at the time we create the > > > > first RC > > > > > (ie, some time after METRON-623 goes in, but not before Monday) > > > will > > > > surely > > > > > be included in the RC, unless something has a bug that can’t be > > > > readily > > > > > resolved. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > --Matt > > > > > > > > > > On 4/5/17, 12:56 PM, "David Lyle" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I'm working on METRON-826 right now. I'll have a PR up today or > > > > > tomorrow at > > > > > the latest. I'd like to see it go as well. > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-826 > > > > > > > > > > -D... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Nick Allen > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to include #509 with the Fastcapa improvements.. > > > > > Already have > > > > > > a +1. I'm just letting it soak giving others some time to > > > > review if > > > > > they > > > > > > feel so inclined. > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-metron/pull/509 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, James Sirota < > > > > jsir...@apache.org> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I second this. I want to see 623 go in in addition to the > > > > > kerberos work. > > > > > > > When both are in I think it makes sense to do the release > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 04.04.2017, 11:33, "Simon Elliston Ball" < > > > > > si...@simonellistonball.com>: > > > > > > > > I'd really like to see METRON-623 (the ui) get into the > > > > release. > > > > > It > > > > > > > feels like the current PR review is getting close, and that > > > > > getting it in > > > > > > > then focussing on follow on tasks in a separate release > > > > would work > > > > > well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would be all for getting a release out if only for the > > > > > Kerberos work. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simon > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On 4 Apr 2017, at 20:15, zeo...@gmail.com < > > > > zeo...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> How far out is the management UI? > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Jon > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017, 2:09 PM Matt Foley < > > > > ma...@apache.org> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> Hi all, > > > > > > > >>> Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last > > > > release was >
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
+1 to 0.4.0 On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Otto Fowler wrote: > +1 > > > On April 11, 2017 at 13:59:46, Matt Foley (ma...@apache.org) wrote: > > Hi all, > Looks to me like the vast majority of the material mentioned below has been > committed. There are still 8 recent PRs that need review and, hopefully, > commit. > > I’m going to go ahead and make a release branch, with the understanding > that any further commits (especially but not limited to Kerberization, > Metron-UI, Metron Management UI, or Mpack support), that come in over the > next 36 hours or so will still be included in the RC. > > Does that meet everyone’s needs? I want to get started because it will > probably take a day or more just to create the branch, an RC build, and > start the sanity testing. > > There’s enough major new stuff here that I’m going to call it 0.4.0. Is > that also okay with everyone? > > Thanks, > --Matt > > On 4/5/17, 6:23 PM, "Ali Nazemian" wrote: > > Dear Metron Devs, > > As Metron users/customers, we are very keen to have all high priority > related features/bugs to the Security as well as Metron-UI and Metron > Management-UI. > > Thanks, > Ali > > On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Ryan Merriman wrote: > > > We just finished responding to the first round of feedback so I don't > think > > we're that far away on METRON-623. > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > > > > > Totally agree would be good to have MPack support. Let’s see how it > > > goes. Wouldn’t want to cut it out for the sake of a day or two. > > > > > > On 4/5/17, 1:14 PM, "Justin Leet" wrote: > > > > > > I've made fairly good progress on > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-799 (The MPack should > > > function > > > in a kerberized cluster). The PR itself might cut close to the > > > deadline, > > > and in particular might be tough to get reviewed in time. > > > > > > I'll do a best effort attempt to get it in to make our Kerberos story > > > more > > > complete, but I'd say the release can go on without this (and we use > > > manual > > > Kerberos in its absence). > > > > > > Justin > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > > > > > > > Sure. To be clear, I wasn’t proposing an exclusive list, just > > > making the > > > > argument that there seemed to be enough to proceed with. Any duly > > > > committed content in the master branch, at the time we create the > > > first RC > > > > (ie, some time after METRON-623 goes in, but not before Monday) > > will > > > surely > > > > be included in the RC, unless something has a bug that can’t be > > > readily > > > > resolved. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > --Matt > > > > > > > > On 4/5/17, 12:56 PM, "David Lyle" wrote: > > > > > > > > I'm working on METRON-826 right now. I'll have a PR up today or > > > > tomorrow at > > > > the latest. I'd like to see it go as well. > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-826 > > > > > > > > -D... > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Nick Allen > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I would like to include #509 with the Fastcapa improvements.. > > > > Already have > > > > > a +1. I'm just letting it soak giving others some time to > > > review if > > > > they > > > > > feel so inclined. > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-metron/pull/509 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, James Sirota < > > > jsir...@apache.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I second this. I want to see 623 go in in addition to the > > > > kerberos work. > > > > > > When both are in I think it makes sense to do the release > > > > > > > > > > > > 04.04.2017, 11:33, "Simon Elliston Ball" < > > > > si...@simonellistonball.com>: > > > > > > > I'd really like to see METRON-623 (the ui) get into the > > > release. > > > > It > > > > > > feels like the current PR review is getting close, and that > > > > getting it in > > > > > > then focussing on follow on tasks in a separate release > > > would work > > > > well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would be all for getting a release out if only for the > > > > Kerberos work. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simon > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On 4 Apr 2017, at 20:15, zeo...@gmail.com < > > > zeo...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> How far out is the management UI? > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Jon > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017, 2:09 PM Matt Foley < > > > ma...@apache.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> Hi all, > > > > > > >>> Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last > > > release was > > > > > finally > > > > > > >>> published, that process started in January :-) > > > > > > >>> Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s > > > been a > > > > ton of > > > > > > >>> really cool new stuff added since then: > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> Biggest items: > > > > > > >>> - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: > > METRON-503) > > > > > > >>>
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
+1 On April 11, 2017 at 13:59:46, Matt Foley (ma...@apache.org) wrote: Hi all, Looks to me like the vast majority of the material mentioned below has been committed. There are still 8 recent PRs that need review and, hopefully, commit. I’m going to go ahead and make a release branch, with the understanding that any further commits (especially but not limited to Kerberization, Metron-UI, Metron Management UI, or Mpack support), that come in over the next 36 hours or so will still be included in the RC. Does that meet everyone’s needs? I want to get started because it will probably take a day or more just to create the branch, an RC build, and start the sanity testing. There’s enough major new stuff here that I’m going to call it 0.4.0. Is that also okay with everyone? Thanks, --Matt On 4/5/17, 6:23 PM, "Ali Nazemian" wrote: Dear Metron Devs, As Metron users/customers, we are very keen to have all high priority related features/bugs to the Security as well as Metron-UI and Metron Management-UI. Thanks, Ali On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Ryan Merriman wrote: > We just finished responding to the first round of feedback so I don't think > we're that far away on METRON-623. > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > > > Totally agree would be good to have MPack support. Let’s see how it > > goes. Wouldn’t want to cut it out for the sake of a day or two. > > > > On 4/5/17, 1:14 PM, "Justin Leet" wrote: > > > > I've made fairly good progress on > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-799 (The MPack should > > function > > in a kerberized cluster). The PR itself might cut close to the > > deadline, > > and in particular might be tough to get reviewed in time. > > > > I'll do a best effort attempt to get it in to make our Kerberos story > > more > > complete, but I'd say the release can go on without this (and we use > > manual > > Kerberos in its absence). > > > > Justin > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > > > > > Sure. To be clear, I wasn’t proposing an exclusive list, just > > making the > > > argument that there seemed to be enough to proceed with. Any duly > > > committed content in the master branch, at the time we create the > > first RC > > > (ie, some time after METRON-623 goes in, but not before Monday) > will > > surely > > > be included in the RC, unless something has a bug that can’t be > > readily > > > resolved. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > --Matt > > > > > > On 4/5/17, 12:56 PM, "David Lyle" wrote: > > > > > > I'm working on METRON-826 right now. I'll have a PR up today or > > > tomorrow at > > > the latest. I'd like to see it go as well. > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-826 > > > > > > -D... > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Nick Allen > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I would like to include #509 with the Fastcapa improvements.. > > > Already have > > > > a +1. I'm just letting it soak giving others some time to > > review if > > > they > > > > feel so inclined. > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-metron/pull/509 > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, James Sirota < > > jsir...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I second this. I want to see 623 go in in addition to the > > > kerberos work. > > > > > When both are in I think it makes sense to do the release > > > > > > > > > > 04.04.2017, 11:33, "Simon Elliston Ball" < > > > si...@simonellistonball.com>: > > > > > > I'd really like to see METRON-623 (the ui) get into the > > release. > > > It > > > > > feels like the current PR review is getting close, and that > > > getting it in > > > > > then focussing on follow on tasks in a separate release > > would work > > > well. > > > > > > > > > > > > I would be all for getting a release out if only for the > > > Kerberos work. > > > > > > > > > > > > Simon > > > > > > > > > > > >> On 4 Apr 2017, at 20:15, zeo...@gmail.com < > > zeo...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> How far out is the management UI? > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Jon > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017, 2:09 PM Matt Foley < > > ma...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Hi all, > > > > > >>> Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last > > release was > > > > finally > > > > > >>> published, that process started in January :-) > > > > > >>> Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s > > been a > > > ton of > > > > > >>> really cool new stuff added since then: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Biggest items: > > > > > >>> - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: > METRON-503) > > > > > >>> - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) > > clusters > > > (mult. > > > > > Jiras) > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Other major new features: > > > > > >>> - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window > > specification for > > > > Profiler > > > > > >>> - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt > > > > > >>> - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during T
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
Hi all, Looks to me like the vast majority of the material mentioned below has been committed. There are still 8 recent PRs that need review and, hopefully, commit. I’m going to go ahead and make a release branch, with the understanding that any further commits (especially but not limited to Kerberization, Metron-UI, Metron Management UI, or Mpack support), that come in over the next 36 hours or so will still be included in the RC. Does that meet everyone’s needs? I want to get started because it will probably take a day or more just to create the branch, an RC build, and start the sanity testing. There’s enough major new stuff here that I’m going to call it 0.4.0. Is that also okay with everyone? Thanks, --Matt On 4/5/17, 6:23 PM, "Ali Nazemian" wrote: Dear Metron Devs, As Metron users/customers, we are very keen to have all high priority related features/bugs to the Security as well as Metron-UI and Metron Management-UI. Thanks, Ali On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Ryan Merriman wrote: > We just finished responding to the first round of feedback so I don't think > we're that far away on METRON-623. > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > > > Totally agree would be good to have MPack support. Let’s see how it > > goes. Wouldn’t want to cut it out for the sake of a day or two. > > > > On 4/5/17, 1:14 PM, "Justin Leet" wrote: > > > > I've made fairly good progress on > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-799 (The MPack should > > function > > in a kerberized cluster). The PR itself might cut close to the > > deadline, > > and in particular might be tough to get reviewed in time. > > > > I'll do a best effort attempt to get it in to make our Kerberos story > > more > > complete, but I'd say the release can go on without this (and we use > > manual > > Kerberos in its absence). > > > > Justin > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > > > > > Sure. To be clear, I wasn’t proposing an exclusive list, just > > making the > > > argument that there seemed to be enough to proceed with. Any duly > > > committed content in the master branch, at the time we create the > > first RC > > > (ie, some time after METRON-623 goes in, but not before Monday) > will > > surely > > > be included in the RC, unless something has a bug that can’t be > > readily > > > resolved. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > --Matt > > > > > > On 4/5/17, 12:56 PM, "David Lyle" wrote: > > > > > > I'm working on METRON-826 right now. I'll have a PR up today or > > > tomorrow at > > > the latest. I'd like to see it go as well. > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-826 > > > > > > -D... > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Nick Allen > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I would like to include #509 with the Fastcapa improvements.. > > > Already have > > > > a +1. I'm just letting it soak giving others some time to > > review if > > > they > > > > feel so inclined. > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-metron/pull/509 > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, James Sirota < > > jsir...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I second this. I want to see 623 go in in addition to the > > > kerberos work. > > > > > When both are in I think it makes sense to do the release > > > > > > > > > > 04.04.2017, 11:33, "Simon Elliston Ball" < > > > si...@simonellistonball.com>: > > > > > > I'd really like to see METRON-623 (the ui) get into the > > release. > > > It > > > > > feels like the current PR review is getting close, and that > > > getting it in > > > > > then focussing on follow on tasks in a separate release > > would work > > > well. > > > > > > > > > > > > I would be all for getting a release out if only for the > > > Kerberos work. > > > > > > > > > > > > Simon > > > > > > > > > > > >> On 4 Apr 2017, at 20:15, zeo...@gmail.com < > > zeo...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> How far out is the management UI? > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Jon > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017, 2:09 PM Matt Foley < > > ma...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
Dear Metron Devs, As Metron users/customers, we are very keen to have all high priority related features/bugs to the Security as well as Metron-UI and Metron Management-UI. Thanks, Ali On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Ryan Merriman wrote: > We just finished responding to the first round of feedback so I don't think > we're that far away on METRON-623. > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > > > Totally agree would be good to have MPack support. Let’s see how it > > goes. Wouldn’t want to cut it out for the sake of a day or two. > > > > On 4/5/17, 1:14 PM, "Justin Leet" wrote: > > > > I've made fairly good progress on > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-799 (The MPack should > > function > > in a kerberized cluster). The PR itself might cut close to the > > deadline, > > and in particular might be tough to get reviewed in time. > > > > I'll do a best effort attempt to get it in to make our Kerberos story > > more > > complete, but I'd say the release can go on without this (and we use > > manual > > Kerberos in its absence). > > > > Justin > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > > > > > Sure. To be clear, I wasn’t proposing an exclusive list, just > > making the > > > argument that there seemed to be enough to proceed with. Any duly > > > committed content in the master branch, at the time we create the > > first RC > > > (ie, some time after METRON-623 goes in, but not before Monday) > will > > surely > > > be included in the RC, unless something has a bug that can’t be > > readily > > > resolved. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > --Matt > > > > > > On 4/5/17, 12:56 PM, "David Lyle" wrote: > > > > > > I'm working on METRON-826 right now. I'll have a PR up today or > > > tomorrow at > > > the latest. I'd like to see it go as well. > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-826 > > > > > > -D... > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Nick Allen > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I would like to include #509 with the Fastcapa improvements.. > > > Already have > > > > a +1. I'm just letting it soak giving others some time to > > review if > > > they > > > > feel so inclined. > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-metron/pull/509 > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, James Sirota < > > jsir...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I second this. I want to see 623 go in in addition to the > > > kerberos work. > > > > > When both are in I think it makes sense to do the release > > > > > > > > > > 04.04.2017, 11:33, "Simon Elliston Ball" < > > > si...@simonellistonball.com>: > > > > > > I'd really like to see METRON-623 (the ui) get into the > > release. > > > It > > > > > feels like the current PR review is getting close, and that > > > getting it in > > > > > then focussing on follow on tasks in a separate release > > would work > > > well. > > > > > > > > > > > > I would be all for getting a release out if only for the > > > Kerberos work. > > > > > > > > > > > > Simon > > > > > > > > > > > >> On 4 Apr 2017, at 20:15, zeo...@gmail.com < > > zeo...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> How far out is the management UI? > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Jon > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017, 2:09 PM Matt Foley < > > ma...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Hi all, > > > > > >>> Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last > > release was > > > > finally > > > > > >>> published, that process started in January :-) > > > > > >>> Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s > > been a > > > ton of > > > > > >>> really cool new stuff added since then: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Biggest items: > > > > > >>> - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: > METRON-503) > > > > > >>> - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) > > clusters > > > (mult. > > > > > Jiras) > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Other major new features: > > > > > >>> - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window > > specification for > > > > Profiler > > > > > >>> - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt > > > > > >>> - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat > > Triage > > > > > >>> - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from > Pcap > > > > > >>> - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler > > > > > >>> - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from > > HDF
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
We just finished responding to the first round of feedback so I don't think we're that far away on METRON-623. On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > Totally agree would be good to have MPack support. Let’s see how it > goes. Wouldn’t want to cut it out for the sake of a day or two. > > On 4/5/17, 1:14 PM, "Justin Leet" wrote: > > I've made fairly good progress on > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-799 (The MPack should > function > in a kerberized cluster). The PR itself might cut close to the > deadline, > and in particular might be tough to get reviewed in time. > > I'll do a best effort attempt to get it in to make our Kerberos story > more > complete, but I'd say the release can go on without this (and we use > manual > Kerberos in its absence). > > Justin > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > > > Sure. To be clear, I wasn’t proposing an exclusive list, just > making the > > argument that there seemed to be enough to proceed with. Any duly > > committed content in the master branch, at the time we create the > first RC > > (ie, some time after METRON-623 goes in, but not before Monday) will > surely > > be included in the RC, unless something has a bug that can’t be > readily > > resolved. > > > > Thanks, > > --Matt > > > > On 4/5/17, 12:56 PM, "David Lyle" wrote: > > > > I'm working on METRON-826 right now. I'll have a PR up today or > > tomorrow at > > the latest. I'd like to see it go as well. > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-826 > > > > -D... > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Nick Allen > wrote: > > > > > I would like to include #509 with the Fastcapa improvements.. > > Already have > > > a +1. I'm just letting it soak giving others some time to > review if > > they > > > feel so inclined. > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-metron/pull/509 > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, James Sirota < > jsir...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > I second this. I want to see 623 go in in addition to the > > kerberos work. > > > > When both are in I think it makes sense to do the release > > > > > > > > 04.04.2017, 11:33, "Simon Elliston Ball" < > > si...@simonellistonball.com>: > > > > > I'd really like to see METRON-623 (the ui) get into the > release. > > It > > > > feels like the current PR review is getting close, and that > > getting it in > > > > then focussing on follow on tasks in a separate release > would work > > well. > > > > > > > > > > I would be all for getting a release out if only for the > > Kerberos work. > > > > > > > > > > Simon > > > > > > > > > >> On 4 Apr 2017, at 20:15, zeo...@gmail.com < > zeo...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> How far out is the management UI? > > > > >> > > > > >> Jon > > > > >> > > > > >>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017, 2:09 PM Matt Foley < > ma...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Hi all, > > > > >>> Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last > release was > > > finally > > > > >>> published, that process started in January :-) > > > > >>> Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s > been a > > ton of > > > > >>> really cool new stuff added since then: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Biggest items: > > > > >>> - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) > > > > >>> - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) > clusters > > (mult. > > > > Jiras) > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Other major new features: > > > > >>> - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window > specification for > > > Profiler > > > > >>> - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt > > > > >>> - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat > Triage > > > > >>> - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap > > > > >>> - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler > > > > >>> - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from > HDFS > > (and huge > > > > >>> speed-up for function resolution) > > > > >>> - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and > > > > >>> - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards > > > > >>> - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar > > > > >>> - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages > > > > >>> - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout > > > > >>> > > > > >>> We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, > and >
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
Totally agree would be good to have MPack support. Let’s see how it goes. Wouldn’t want to cut it out for the sake of a day or two. On 4/5/17, 1:14 PM, "Justin Leet" wrote: I've made fairly good progress on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-799 (The MPack should function in a kerberized cluster). The PR itself might cut close to the deadline, and in particular might be tough to get reviewed in time. I'll do a best effort attempt to get it in to make our Kerberos story more complete, but I'd say the release can go on without this (and we use manual Kerberos in its absence). Justin On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > Sure. To be clear, I wasn’t proposing an exclusive list, just making the > argument that there seemed to be enough to proceed with. Any duly > committed content in the master branch, at the time we create the first RC > (ie, some time after METRON-623 goes in, but not before Monday) will surely > be included in the RC, unless something has a bug that can’t be readily > resolved. > > Thanks, > --Matt > > On 4/5/17, 12:56 PM, "David Lyle" wrote: > > I'm working on METRON-826 right now. I'll have a PR up today or > tomorrow at > the latest. I'd like to see it go as well. > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-826 > > -D... > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Nick Allen wrote: > > > I would like to include #509 with the Fastcapa improvements.. > Already have > > a +1. I'm just letting it soak giving others some time to review if > they > > feel so inclined. > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-metron/pull/509 > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, James Sirota > wrote: > > > > > I second this. I want to see 623 go in in addition to the > kerberos work. > > > When both are in I think it makes sense to do the release > > > > > > 04.04.2017, 11:33, "Simon Elliston Ball" < > si...@simonellistonball.com>: > > > > I'd really like to see METRON-623 (the ui) get into the release. > It > > > feels like the current PR review is getting close, and that > getting it in > > > then focussing on follow on tasks in a separate release would work > well. > > > > > > > > I would be all for getting a release out if only for the > Kerberos work. > > > > > > > > Simon > > > > > > > >> On 4 Apr 2017, at 20:15, zeo...@gmail.com > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> How far out is the management UI? > > > >> > > > >> Jon > > > >> > > > >>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017, 2:09 PM Matt Foley > wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> Hi all, > > > >>> Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last release was > > finally > > > >>> published, that process started in January :-) > > > >>> Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s been a > ton of > > > >>> really cool new stuff added since then: > > > >>> > > > >>> Biggest items: > > > >>> - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) > > > >>> - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) clusters > (mult. > > > Jiras) > > > >>> > > > >>> Other major new features: > > > >>> - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window specification for > > Profiler > > > >>> - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt > > > >>> - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat Triage > > > >>> - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap > > > >>> - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler > > > >>> - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from HDFS > (and huge > > > >>> speed-up for function resolution) > > > >>> - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and > > > >>> - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards > > > >>> - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar > > > >>> - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages > > > >>> - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout > > > >>> > > > >>> We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, and > > > improvements to > > > >>> deployment tools (docker, ansible, mpack, quickdev, and > fulldev). > > > >>> > > > >>> I think the REST API and Kerberization, by themselves, would > > justify a > > > >>> release. Along with the others, I’d like to propose that we > make a > > > release > > > >>> soon. The time frame I had in mind was at the end of this > week I > > > could cut
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
I've made fairly good progress on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-799 (The MPack should function in a kerberized cluster). The PR itself might cut close to the deadline, and in particular might be tough to get reviewed in time. I'll do a best effort attempt to get it in to make our Kerberos story more complete, but I'd say the release can go on without this (and we use manual Kerberos in its absence). Justin On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Matt Foley wrote: > Sure. To be clear, I wasn’t proposing an exclusive list, just making the > argument that there seemed to be enough to proceed with. Any duly > committed content in the master branch, at the time we create the first RC > (ie, some time after METRON-623 goes in, but not before Monday) will surely > be included in the RC, unless something has a bug that can’t be readily > resolved. > > Thanks, > --Matt > > On 4/5/17, 12:56 PM, "David Lyle" wrote: > > I'm working on METRON-826 right now. I'll have a PR up today or > tomorrow at > the latest. I'd like to see it go as well. > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-826 > > -D... > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Nick Allen wrote: > > > I would like to include #509 with the Fastcapa improvements.. > Already have > > a +1. I'm just letting it soak giving others some time to review if > they > > feel so inclined. > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-metron/pull/509 > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, James Sirota > wrote: > > > > > I second this. I want to see 623 go in in addition to the > kerberos work. > > > When both are in I think it makes sense to do the release > > > > > > 04.04.2017, 11:33, "Simon Elliston Ball" < > si...@simonellistonball.com>: > > > > I'd really like to see METRON-623 (the ui) get into the release. > It > > > feels like the current PR review is getting close, and that > getting it in > > > then focussing on follow on tasks in a separate release would work > well. > > > > > > > > I would be all for getting a release out if only for the > Kerberos work. > > > > > > > > Simon > > > > > > > >> On 4 Apr 2017, at 20:15, zeo...@gmail.com > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> How far out is the management UI? > > > >> > > > >> Jon > > > >> > > > >>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017, 2:09 PM Matt Foley > wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> Hi all, > > > >>> Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last release was > > finally > > > >>> published, that process started in January :-) > > > >>> Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s been a > ton of > > > >>> really cool new stuff added since then: > > > >>> > > > >>> Biggest items: > > > >>> - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) > > > >>> - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) clusters > (mult. > > > Jiras) > > > >>> > > > >>> Other major new features: > > > >>> - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window specification for > > Profiler > > > >>> - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt > > > >>> - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat Triage > > > >>> - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap > > > >>> - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler > > > >>> - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from HDFS > (and huge > > > >>> speed-up for function resolution) > > > >>> - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and > > > >>> - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards > > > >>> - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar > > > >>> - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages > > > >>> - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout > > > >>> > > > >>> We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, and > > > improvements to > > > >>> deployment tools (docker, ansible, mpack, quickdev, and > fulldev). > > > >>> > > > >>> I think the REST API and Kerberization, by themselves, would > > justify a > > > >>> release. Along with the others, I’d like to propose that we > make a > > > release > > > >>> soon. The time frame I had in mind was at the end of this > week I > > > could cut > > > >>> a release branch (so on-going work in master doesn’t get > blocked) > > and > > > start > > > >>> the process of generating an RC. > > > >>> > > > >>> What do you-all think? > > > >>> Also, what additional work do you think should be included in > this > > > >>> release, and can it realistically get done by the end of this > week? > > > The > > > >>> time frame is, of course, flexible at the pleasure of the > community > > – > > > but > > > >>> also, there will be another release in another couple months > or so, > > > so no > > > >>> need to rush stuff. > > > >>> >
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
Sure. To be clear, I wasn’t proposing an exclusive list, just making the argument that there seemed to be enough to proceed with. Any duly committed content in the master branch, at the time we create the first RC (ie, some time after METRON-623 goes in, but not before Monday) will surely be included in the RC, unless something has a bug that can’t be readily resolved. Thanks, --Matt On 4/5/17, 12:56 PM, "David Lyle" wrote: I'm working on METRON-826 right now. I'll have a PR up today or tomorrow at the latest. I'd like to see it go as well. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-826 -D... On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Nick Allen wrote: > I would like to include #509 with the Fastcapa improvements.. Already have > a +1. I'm just letting it soak giving others some time to review if they > feel so inclined. > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-metron/pull/509 > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, James Sirota wrote: > > > I second this. I want to see 623 go in in addition to the kerberos work. > > When both are in I think it makes sense to do the release > > > > 04.04.2017, 11:33, "Simon Elliston Ball" : > > > I'd really like to see METRON-623 (the ui) get into the release. It > > feels like the current PR review is getting close, and that getting it in > > then focussing on follow on tasks in a separate release would work well. > > > > > > I would be all for getting a release out if only for the Kerberos work. > > > > > > Simon > > > > > >> On 4 Apr 2017, at 20:15, zeo...@gmail.com wrote: > > >> > > >> How far out is the management UI? > > >> > > >> Jon > > >> > > >>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017, 2:09 PM Matt Foley wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Hi all, > > >>> Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last release was > finally > > >>> published, that process started in January :-) > > >>> Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s been a ton of > > >>> really cool new stuff added since then: > > >>> > > >>> Biggest items: > > >>> - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) > > >>> - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) clusters (mult. > > Jiras) > > >>> > > >>> Other major new features: > > >>> - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window specification for > Profiler > > >>> - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt > > >>> - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat Triage > > >>> - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap > > >>> - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler > > >>> - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from HDFS (and huge > > >>> speed-up for function resolution) > > >>> - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and > > >>> - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards > > >>> - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar > > >>> - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages > > >>> - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout > > >>> > > >>> We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, and > > improvements to > > >>> deployment tools (docker, ansible, mpack, quickdev, and fulldev). > > >>> > > >>> I think the REST API and Kerberization, by themselves, would > justify a > > >>> release. Along with the others, I’d like to propose that we make a > > release > > >>> soon. The time frame I had in mind was at the end of this week I > > could cut > > >>> a release branch (so on-going work in master doesn’t get blocked) > and > > start > > >>> the process of generating an RC. > > >>> > > >>> What do you-all think? > > >>> Also, what additional work do you think should be included in this > > >>> release, and can it realistically get done by the end of this week? > > The > > >>> time frame is, of course, flexible at the pleasure of the community > – > > but > > >>> also, there will be another release in another couple months or so, > > so no > > >>> need to rush stuff. > > >>> > > >>> Thanks, > > >>> --Matt > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >> > > >> Jon > > > > --- > > Thank you, > > > > James Sirota > > PPMC- Apache Metron (Incubating) > > jsirota AT apache DOT org > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
Ok, 820 just went in this morning, and sounds like there’s no problem with 509 being in by maybe Monday? Consensus seems to be to wait for METRON-623 (Management UI) also, so that’s what I’ll do. Any projection about how long that will be? Review seems to be active, so hopefully not too many days to go. Thanks for everybody’s input. We’ll check status on Monday. --Matt On 4/5/17, 12:52 PM, "Nick Allen" wrote: I would like to include #509 with the Fastcapa improvements.. Already have a +1. I'm just letting it soak giving others some time to review if they feel so inclined. https://github.com/apache/incubator-metron/pull/509 On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, James Sirota wrote: > I second this. I want to see 623 go in in addition to the kerberos work. > When both are in I think it makes sense to do the release > > 04.04.2017, 11:33, "Simon Elliston Ball" : > > I'd really like to see METRON-623 (the ui) get into the release. It > feels like the current PR review is getting close, and that getting it in > then focussing on follow on tasks in a separate release would work well. > > > > I would be all for getting a release out if only for the Kerberos work. > > > > Simon > > > >> On 4 Apr 2017, at 20:15, zeo...@gmail.com wrote: > >> > >> How far out is the management UI? > >> > >> Jon > >> > >>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017, 2:09 PM Matt Foley wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi all, > >>> Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last release was finally > >>> published, that process started in January :-) > >>> Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s been a ton of > >>> really cool new stuff added since then: > >>> > >>> Biggest items: > >>> - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) > >>> - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) clusters (mult. > Jiras) > >>> > >>> Other major new features: > >>> - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window specification for Profiler > >>> - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt > >>> - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat Triage > >>> - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap > >>> - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler > >>> - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from HDFS (and huge > >>> speed-up for function resolution) > >>> - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and > >>> - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards > >>> - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar > >>> - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages > >>> - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout > >>> > >>> We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, and > improvements to > >>> deployment tools (docker, ansible, mpack, quickdev, and fulldev). > >>> > >>> I think the REST API and Kerberization, by themselves, would justify a > >>> release. Along with the others, I’d like to propose that we make a > release > >>> soon. The time frame I had in mind was at the end of this week I > could cut > >>> a release branch (so on-going work in master doesn’t get blocked) and > start > >>> the process of generating an RC. > >>> > >>> What do you-all think? > >>> Also, what additional work do you think should be included in this > >>> release, and can it realistically get done by the end of this week? > The > >>> time frame is, of course, flexible at the pleasure of the community – > but > >>> also, there will be another release in another couple months or so, > so no > >>> need to rush stuff. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> --Matt > >>> > >>> -- > >> > >> Jon > > --- > Thank you, > > James Sirota > PPMC- Apache Metron (Incubating) > jsirota AT apache DOT org >
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
I'm working on METRON-826 right now. I'll have a PR up today or tomorrow at the latest. I'd like to see it go as well. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-826 -D... On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Nick Allen wrote: > I would like to include #509 with the Fastcapa improvements.. Already have > a +1. I'm just letting it soak giving others some time to review if they > feel so inclined. > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-metron/pull/509 > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, James Sirota wrote: > > > I second this. I want to see 623 go in in addition to the kerberos work. > > When both are in I think it makes sense to do the release > > > > 04.04.2017, 11:33, "Simon Elliston Ball" : > > > I'd really like to see METRON-623 (the ui) get into the release. It > > feels like the current PR review is getting close, and that getting it in > > then focussing on follow on tasks in a separate release would work well. > > > > > > I would be all for getting a release out if only for the Kerberos work. > > > > > > Simon > > > > > >> On 4 Apr 2017, at 20:15, zeo...@gmail.com wrote: > > >> > > >> How far out is the management UI? > > >> > > >> Jon > > >> > > >>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017, 2:09 PM Matt Foley wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Hi all, > > >>> Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last release was > finally > > >>> published, that process started in January :-) > > >>> Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s been a ton of > > >>> really cool new stuff added since then: > > >>> > > >>> Biggest items: > > >>> - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) > > >>> - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) clusters (mult. > > Jiras) > > >>> > > >>> Other major new features: > > >>> - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window specification for > Profiler > > >>> - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt > > >>> - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat Triage > > >>> - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap > > >>> - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler > > >>> - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from HDFS (and huge > > >>> speed-up for function resolution) > > >>> - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and > > >>> - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards > > >>> - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar > > >>> - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages > > >>> - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout > > >>> > > >>> We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, and > > improvements to > > >>> deployment tools (docker, ansible, mpack, quickdev, and fulldev). > > >>> > > >>> I think the REST API and Kerberization, by themselves, would > justify a > > >>> release. Along with the others, I’d like to propose that we make a > > release > > >>> soon. The time frame I had in mind was at the end of this week I > > could cut > > >>> a release branch (so on-going work in master doesn’t get blocked) > and > > start > > >>> the process of generating an RC. > > >>> > > >>> What do you-all think? > > >>> Also, what additional work do you think should be included in this > > >>> release, and can it realistically get done by the end of this week? > > The > > >>> time frame is, of course, flexible at the pleasure of the community > – > > but > > >>> also, there will be another release in another couple months or so, > > so no > > >>> need to rush stuff. > > >>> > > >>> Thanks, > > >>> --Matt > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >> > > >> Jon > > > > --- > > Thank you, > > > > James Sirota > > PPMC- Apache Metron (Incubating) > > jsirota AT apache DOT org > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
I would like to include #509 with the Fastcapa improvements.. Already have a +1. I'm just letting it soak giving others some time to review if they feel so inclined. https://github.com/apache/incubator-metron/pull/509 On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:50 PM, James Sirota wrote: > I second this. I want to see 623 go in in addition to the kerberos work. > When both are in I think it makes sense to do the release > > 04.04.2017, 11:33, "Simon Elliston Ball" : > > I'd really like to see METRON-623 (the ui) get into the release. It > feels like the current PR review is getting close, and that getting it in > then focussing on follow on tasks in a separate release would work well. > > > > I would be all for getting a release out if only for the Kerberos work. > > > > Simon > > > >> On 4 Apr 2017, at 20:15, zeo...@gmail.com wrote: > >> > >> How far out is the management UI? > >> > >> Jon > >> > >>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017, 2:09 PM Matt Foley wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi all, > >>> Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last release was finally > >>> published, that process started in January :-) > >>> Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s been a ton of > >>> really cool new stuff added since then: > >>> > >>> Biggest items: > >>> - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) > >>> - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) clusters (mult. > Jiras) > >>> > >>> Other major new features: > >>> - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window specification for Profiler > >>> - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt > >>> - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat Triage > >>> - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap > >>> - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler > >>> - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from HDFS (and huge > >>> speed-up for function resolution) > >>> - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and > >>> - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards > >>> - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar > >>> - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages > >>> - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout > >>> > >>> We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, and > improvements to > >>> deployment tools (docker, ansible, mpack, quickdev, and fulldev). > >>> > >>> I think the REST API and Kerberization, by themselves, would justify a > >>> release. Along with the others, I’d like to propose that we make a > release > >>> soon. The time frame I had in mind was at the end of this week I > could cut > >>> a release branch (so on-going work in master doesn’t get blocked) and > start > >>> the process of generating an RC. > >>> > >>> What do you-all think? > >>> Also, what additional work do you think should be included in this > >>> release, and can it realistically get done by the end of this week? > The > >>> time frame is, of course, flexible at the pleasure of the community – > but > >>> also, there will be another release in another couple months or so, > so no > >>> need to rush stuff. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> --Matt > >>> > >>> -- > >> > >> Jon > > --- > Thank you, > > James Sirota > PPMC- Apache Metron (Incubating) > jsirota AT apache DOT org >
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
I second this. I want to see 623 go in in addition to the kerberos work. When both are in I think it makes sense to do the release 04.04.2017, 11:33, "Simon Elliston Ball" : > I'd really like to see METRON-623 (the ui) get into the release. It feels > like the current PR review is getting close, and that getting it in then > focussing on follow on tasks in a separate release would work well. > > I would be all for getting a release out if only for the Kerberos work. > > Simon > >> On 4 Apr 2017, at 20:15, zeo...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> How far out is the management UI? >> >> Jon >> >>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017, 2:09 PM Matt Foley wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last release was finally >>> published, that process started in January :-) >>> Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s been a ton of >>> really cool new stuff added since then: >>> >>> Biggest items: >>> - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) >>> - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) clusters (mult. Jiras) >>> >>> Other major new features: >>> - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window specification for Profiler >>> - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt >>> - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat Triage >>> - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap >>> - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler >>> - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from HDFS (and huge >>> speed-up for function resolution) >>> - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and >>> - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards >>> - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar >>> - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages >>> - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout >>> >>> We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, and improvements to >>> deployment tools (docker, ansible, mpack, quickdev, and fulldev). >>> >>> I think the REST API and Kerberization, by themselves, would justify a >>> release. Along with the others, I’d like to propose that we make a release >>> soon. The time frame I had in mind was at the end of this week I could cut >>> a release branch (so on-going work in master doesn’t get blocked) and start >>> the process of generating an RC. >>> >>> What do you-all think? >>> Also, what additional work do you think should be included in this >>> release, and can it realistically get done by the end of this week? The >>> time frame is, of course, flexible at the pleasure of the community – but >>> also, there will be another release in another couple months or so, so no >>> need to rush stuff. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> --Matt >>> >>> -- >> >> Jon --- Thank you, James Sirota PPMC- Apache Metron (Incubating) jsirota AT apache DOT org
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
>> another incubator release? It depends on the timing. The last release took 3 weeks and 5 RCs to get approval as a release within the Metron community. Hopefully this one won’t be as hard, but it’s likely it will take a couple weeks, especially since this is my first cycle as Release Manager. If, as hoped, the Board graduates us to TLP at the Apr 19 meeting, this could become our first release as a TLP. On the other hand, if it goes really fast, we could go ahead and submit it as another incubator release. And if graduation comes in the middle, we’d just withdraw that and re-vote as a TLP, on our own authority as delegated by the Board. Basically, either way works out. Thanks, --Matt From: Otto Fowler Date: Tuesday, April 4, 2017 at 11:43 AM To: "dev@metron.incubator.apache.org" , Matt Foley Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal So this would be another incubator release? On April 4, 2017 at 14:09:58, Matt Foley (ma...@apache.org) wrote: Hi all, Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last release was finally published, that process started in January :-) Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s been a ton of really cool new stuff added since then: Biggest items: - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) clusters (mult. Jiras) Other major new features: - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window specification for Profiler - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat Triage - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from HDFS (and huge speed-up for function resolution) - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, and improvements to deployment tools (docker, ansible, mpack, quickdev, and fulldev). I think the REST API and Kerberization, by themselves, would justify a release. Along with the others, I’d like to propose that we make a release soon. The time frame I had in mind was at the end of this week I could cut a release branch (so on-going work in master doesn’t get blocked) and start the process of generating an RC. What do you-all think? Also, what additional work do you think should be included in this release, and can it realistically get done by the end of this week? The time frame is, of course, flexible at the pleasure of the community – but also, there will be another release in another couple months or so, so no need to rush stuff. Thanks, --Matt
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
So this would be another incubator release? On April 4, 2017 at 14:09:58, Matt Foley (ma...@apache.org) wrote: Hi all, Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last release was finally published, that process started in January :-) Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s been a ton of really cool new stuff added since then: Biggest items: - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) clusters (mult. Jiras) Other major new features: - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window specification for Profiler - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat Triage - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from HDFS (and huge speed-up for function resolution) - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, and improvements to deployment tools (docker, ansible, mpack, quickdev, and fulldev). I think the REST API and Kerberization, by themselves, would justify a release. Along with the others, I’d like to propose that we make a release soon. The time frame I had in mind was at the end of this week I could cut a release branch (so on-going work in master doesn’t get blocked) and start the process of generating an RC. What do you-all think? Also, what additional work do you think should be included in this release, and can it realistically get done by the end of this week? The time frame is, of course, flexible at the pleasure of the community – but also, there will be another release in another couple months or so, so no need to rush stuff. Thanks, --Matt
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
I'd like to see METRON-820 get in since it's correcting a performance regression introduced earlier in the release. I'll have it in by wednesday of this week. On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Simon Elliston Ball < si...@simonellistonball.com> wrote: > I'd really like to see METRON-623 (the ui) get into the release. It feels > like the current PR review is getting close, and that getting it in then > focussing on follow on tasks in a separate release would work well. > > I would be all for getting a release out if only for the Kerberos work. > > Simon > > > On 4 Apr 2017, at 20:15, zeo...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > How far out is the management UI? > > > > Jon > > > >> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017, 2:09 PM Matt Foley wrote: > >> > >> Hi all, > >> Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last release was finally > >> published, that process started in January :-) > >> Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s been a ton of > >> really cool new stuff added since then: > >> > >> Biggest items: > >> - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) > >> - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) clusters (mult. > Jiras) > >> > >> Other major new features: > >> - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window specification for Profiler > >> - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt > >> - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat Triage > >> - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap > >> - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler > >> - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from HDFS (and huge > >> speed-up for function resolution) > >> - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and > >> - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards > >> - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar > >> - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages > >> - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout > >> > >> We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, and improvements > to > >> deployment tools (docker, ansible, mpack, quickdev, and fulldev). > >> > >> I think the REST API and Kerberization, by themselves, would justify a > >> release. Along with the others, I’d like to propose that we make a > release > >> soon. The time frame I had in mind was at the end of this week I could > cut > >> a release branch (so on-going work in master doesn’t get blocked) and > start > >> the process of generating an RC. > >> > >> What do you-all think? > >> Also, what additional work do you think should be included in this > >> release, and can it realistically get done by the end of this week? The > >> time frame is, of course, flexible at the pleasure of the community – > but > >> also, there will be another release in another couple months or so, so > no > >> need to rush stuff. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> --Matt > >> > >> > >> -- > > > > Jon >
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
I'd really like to see METRON-623 (the ui) get into the release. It feels like the current PR review is getting close, and that getting it in then focussing on follow on tasks in a separate release would work well. I would be all for getting a release out if only for the Kerberos work. Simon > On 4 Apr 2017, at 20:15, zeo...@gmail.com wrote: > > How far out is the management UI? > > Jon > >> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017, 2:09 PM Matt Foley wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last release was finally >> published, that process started in January :-) >> Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s been a ton of >> really cool new stuff added since then: >> >> Biggest items: >> - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) >> - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) clusters (mult. Jiras) >> >> Other major new features: >> - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window specification for Profiler >> - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt >> - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat Triage >> - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap >> - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler >> - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from HDFS (and huge >> speed-up for function resolution) >> - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and >> - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards >> - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar >> - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages >> - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout >> >> We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, and improvements to >> deployment tools (docker, ansible, mpack, quickdev, and fulldev). >> >> I think the REST API and Kerberization, by themselves, would justify a >> release. Along with the others, I’d like to propose that we make a release >> soon. The time frame I had in mind was at the end of this week I could cut >> a release branch (so on-going work in master doesn’t get blocked) and start >> the process of generating an RC. >> >> What do you-all think? >> Also, what additional work do you think should be included in this >> release, and can it realistically get done by the end of this week? The >> time frame is, of course, flexible at the pleasure of the community – but >> also, there will be another release in another couple months or so, so no >> need to rush stuff. >> >> Thanks, >> --Matt >> >> >> -- > > Jon
Re: [DISCUSS] next release proposal
How far out is the management UI? Jon On Tue, Apr 4, 2017, 2:09 PM Matt Foley wrote: > Hi all, > Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last release was finally > published, that process started in January :-) > Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s been a ton of > really cool new stuff added since then: > > Biggest items: > - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) > - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) clusters (mult. Jiras) > > Other major new features: > - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window specification for Profiler > - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt > - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat Triage > - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap > - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler > - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from HDFS (and huge > speed-up for function resolution) > - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and > - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards > - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar > - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages > - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout > > We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, and improvements to > deployment tools (docker, ansible, mpack, quickdev, and fulldev). > > I think the REST API and Kerberization, by themselves, would justify a > release. Along with the others, I’d like to propose that we make a release > soon. The time frame I had in mind was at the end of this week I could cut > a release branch (so on-going work in master doesn’t get blocked) and start > the process of generating an RC. > > What do you-all think? > Also, what additional work do you think should be included in this > release, and can it realistically get done by the end of this week? The > time frame is, of course, flexible at the pleasure of the community – but > also, there will be another release in another couple months or so, so no > need to rush stuff. > > Thanks, > --Matt > > > -- Jon
[DISCUSS] next release proposal
Hi all, Although it’s only been a few weeks since the last release was finally published, that process started in January :-) Also, the last commit in 0.3.1 was Feb 23, and there’s been a ton of really cool new stuff added since then: Biggest items: - Multiple commits for REST API (base Jira: METRON-503) - Multiple commits to work with Kerberized (secure) clusters (mult. Jiras) Other major new features: - METRON-690: DSL-based sparse time window specification for Profiler - METRON-733: Remove Geo db from ParserBolt - METRON-686: Record rule set that fired during Threat Triage - METRON-743: Sort files when reading results from Pcap - METRON-701: Triage metrics produced by Profiler - METRON-744: Stellar external functions loaded from HDFS (and huge speed-up for function resolution) - METRON-694: Index errors from Topologies, and - METRON-745: Create Error dashboards - METRON-712: Separate eval from parse in Stellar - METRON-765: Add GUID to messages - METRON-793: Updated to storm-kafka-client spout We’ve also had numerous bug fixes, docs improvements, and improvements to deployment tools (docker, ansible, mpack, quickdev, and fulldev). I think the REST API and Kerberization, by themselves, would justify a release. Along with the others, I’d like to propose that we make a release soon. The time frame I had in mind was at the end of this week I could cut a release branch (so on-going work in master doesn’t get blocked) and start the process of generating an RC. What do you-all think? Also, what additional work do you think should be included in this release, and can it realistically get done by the end of this week? The time frame is, of course, flexible at the pleasure of the community – but also, there will be another release in another couple months or so, so no need to rush stuff. Thanks, --Matt
