Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NiFi Registry 0.7.0
+1 binding. Verified full clean build w contrib check. Sources match commit tag. Hashes/Signature good. L looks good. Builds/runs on Java 11. Version control to/from NiFi on non secured config. On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 8:32 AM Bryan Bende wrote: > Hello, > > I am pleased to be calling this vote for the source release of Apache NiFi > Registry 0.7.0. > > The source zip, including signatures, digests, etc. can be found at: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachenifi-1161 > > The source being voted upon and the convenience binaries can be found at: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/nifi/nifi-registry/nifi-registry-0.7.0/ > > A helpful reminder on how the release candidate verification process works: > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFI/How+to+help+verify+an+Apache+NiFi+release+candidate > > The Git tag is nifi-registry-0.7.0-RC1 > The Git commit ID is c8f26039712354b94c4d458b7ea491316c6facac > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=nifi-registry.git;a=commit;h=c8f26039712354b94c4d458b7ea491316c6facac > > Checksums of nifi-registry-0.7.0-source-release.zip: > SHA256: acc6b21444d229d78b8a604750231e1c7e80495c9cccfb59ec043ebe952fd2a8 > SHA512: > > 428839e0c861095547e328fcfda42cb3f2a87c0b03f7205d6878f8b7267975fe2ad051d4b5f980cac8f47a249c8ee21686c8d909f275454e25d8a654099bd683 > > Release artifacts are signed with the following key: > https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/bbende.asc > > KEYS file available here: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/nifi/KEYS > > 19 issues were closed/resolved for this release: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12320920=12346077 > > Release note highlights can be found here: > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFIREG/Release+Notes#ReleaseNotes-NiFiRegistry0.7.0 > > The vote will be open for 72 hours. > Please download the release candidate and evaluate the necessary items > including checking hashes, signatures, build from source, and test. Then > please vote: > > [ ] +1 Release this package as nifi-registry-0.7.0 > [ ] +0 no opinion > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... >
Re: [discuss]Release MiNiFi-CPP 0.8.0
"To allow the community some time to finalize the API, I would not rush 1.0 right after 0.8, unless we see that the API is stable and something we can commit to." +1 to that On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 10:28 AM Marton Szasz wrote: > Hi, > > +1. There are countless fixes and stability improvements on the main > development branch that would benefit the majority of users. > > Breaking changes: there are some minor API breakages compared to 0.7, but > there was an effort to avoid breaking core APIs and the configuration > syntax. > > I agree with Marc that we should allow ourselves more freedom to fix issues > even at the cost of breaking APIs, especially before 1.0. To allow the > community some time to finalize the API, I would not rush 1.0 right after > 0.8, unless we see that the API is stable and something we can commit to. > > Thanks, regards, > Marton > > On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 at 17:36, Marc Parisi wrote: > > > +1 to 0.8.0. Been keeping up with changes and I think the progress is > > great. > > > > In my opinion the breaking changes are long coming and probably would be > > appreciated by the community. > > > > Arpad are you thinking of going to 1.x? You're discussing 0.8, but is > there > > any reason to not jump to 1.x after that? > > > > Thanks, > > Marc > > > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 10:12 AM Joe Witt wrote: > > > > > Arpad > > > > > > Yep makes sense. Frankly the 0. versioning gives the flexibility to do > > > these breaking changes during this stage of the lifecycle. > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 7:06 AM Arpad Boda wrote: > > > > > > > Hey, > > > > > > > > Quite a lot of time has passed since the last release and also a lot > of > > > > improvements and bug fixes have been made (Memleaks fixed, new > > > threadpool, > > > > some new processors, etc), so I think it's time for a new release. > > > > > > > > Another important aspect would be the release of the current state of > > the > > > > source before introducing some breaking changes - which seems to be > > > > necessary at this point. > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > Thanks, regards, > > > > Arpad > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [discuss]Release MiNiFi-CPP 0.8.0
Hi, +1. There are countless fixes and stability improvements on the main development branch that would benefit the majority of users. Breaking changes: there are some minor API breakages compared to 0.7, but there was an effort to avoid breaking core APIs and the configuration syntax. I agree with Marc that we should allow ourselves more freedom to fix issues even at the cost of breaking APIs, especially before 1.0. To allow the community some time to finalize the API, I would not rush 1.0 right after 0.8, unless we see that the API is stable and something we can commit to. Thanks, regards, Marton On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 at 17:36, Marc Parisi wrote: > +1 to 0.8.0. Been keeping up with changes and I think the progress is > great. > > In my opinion the breaking changes are long coming and probably would be > appreciated by the community. > > Arpad are you thinking of going to 1.x? You're discussing 0.8, but is there > any reason to not jump to 1.x after that? > > Thanks, > Marc > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 10:12 AM Joe Witt wrote: > > > Arpad > > > > Yep makes sense. Frankly the 0. versioning gives the flexibility to do > > these breaking changes during this stage of the lifecycle. > > > > Thanks > > > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 7:06 AM Arpad Boda wrote: > > > > > Hey, > > > > > > Quite a lot of time has passed since the last release and also a lot of > > > improvements and bug fixes have been made (Memleaks fixed, new > > threadpool, > > > some new processors, etc), so I think it's time for a new release. > > > > > > Another important aspect would be the release of the current state of > the > > > source before introducing some breaking changes - which seems to be > > > necessary at this point. > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > Thanks, regards, > > > Arpad > > > > > >
Re: Jira contributor access
I added you to the contributors role. Welcome to the project. Andy LoPresto alopre...@apache.org alopresto.apa...@gmail.com He/Him PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > On Jul 15, 2020, at 9:26 AM, Bora Avcı wrote: > > jira username : boraavci > > Thanks. > > Bora AVCI
Jira contributor access
jira username : boraavci Thanks. Bora AVCI
Re: [discuss]Release MiNiFi-CPP 0.8.0
+1 to 0.8.0. Been keeping up with changes and I think the progress is great. In my opinion the breaking changes are long coming and probably would be appreciated by the community. Arpad are you thinking of going to 1.x? You're discussing 0.8, but is there any reason to not jump to 1.x after that? Thanks, Marc On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 10:12 AM Joe Witt wrote: > Arpad > > Yep makes sense. Frankly the 0. versioning gives the flexibility to do > these breaking changes during this stage of the lifecycle. > > Thanks > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 7:06 AM Arpad Boda wrote: > > > Hey, > > > > Quite a lot of time has passed since the last release and also a lot of > > improvements and bug fixes have been made (Memleaks fixed, new > threadpool, > > some new processors, etc), so I think it's time for a new release. > > > > Another important aspect would be the release of the current state of the > > source before introducing some breaking changes - which seems to be > > necessary at this point. > > > > What do you think? > > > > Thanks, regards, > > Arpad > > >
[VOTE] Release Apache NiFi Registry 0.7.0
Hello, I am pleased to be calling this vote for the source release of Apache NiFi Registry 0.7.0. The source zip, including signatures, digests, etc. can be found at: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachenifi-1161 The source being voted upon and the convenience binaries can be found at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/nifi/nifi-registry/nifi-registry-0.7.0/ A helpful reminder on how the release candidate verification process works: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFI/How+to+help+verify+an+Apache+NiFi+release+candidate The Git tag is nifi-registry-0.7.0-RC1 The Git commit ID is c8f26039712354b94c4d458b7ea491316c6facac https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=nifi-registry.git;a=commit;h=c8f26039712354b94c4d458b7ea491316c6facac Checksums of nifi-registry-0.7.0-source-release.zip: SHA256: acc6b21444d229d78b8a604750231e1c7e80495c9cccfb59ec043ebe952fd2a8 SHA512: 428839e0c861095547e328fcfda42cb3f2a87c0b03f7205d6878f8b7267975fe2ad051d4b5f980cac8f47a249c8ee21686c8d909f275454e25d8a654099bd683 Release artifacts are signed with the following key: https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/bbende.asc KEYS file available here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/nifi/KEYS 19 issues were closed/resolved for this release: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12320920=12346077 Release note highlights can be found here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFIREG/Release+Notes#ReleaseNotes-NiFiRegistry0.7.0 The vote will be open for 72 hours. Please download the release candidate and evaluate the necessary items including checking hashes, signatures, build from source, and test. Then please vote: [ ] +1 Release this package as nifi-registry-0.7.0 [ ] +0 no opinion [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
Re: [discuss]Release MiNiFi-CPP 0.8.0
Arpad Yep makes sense. Frankly the 0. versioning gives the flexibility to do these breaking changes during this stage of the lifecycle. Thanks On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 7:06 AM Arpad Boda wrote: > Hey, > > Quite a lot of time has passed since the last release and also a lot of > improvements and bug fixes have been made (Memleaks fixed, new threadpool, > some new processors, etc), so I think it's time for a new release. > > Another important aspect would be the release of the current state of the > source before introducing some breaking changes - which seems to be > necessary at this point. > > What do you think? > > Thanks, regards, > Arpad >
[discuss]Release MiNiFi-CPP 0.8.0
Hey, Quite a lot of time has passed since the last release and also a lot of improvements and bug fixes have been made (Memleaks fixed, new threadpool, some new processors, etc), so I think it's time for a new release. Another important aspect would be the release of the current state of the source before introducing some breaking changes - which seems to be necessary at this point. What do you think? Thanks, regards, Arpad
Re: [discuss] 1.12.0 or 1.11.5...
Sounds good to me. Happy to take care of the RC duties for another release once the OIDC work is available. Le mar. 14 juil. 2020 à 21:31, Bryan Bende a écrit : > Spoke with Nathan again and there is still more work to do for OIDC in > registry. > > If no one objects, I'll work on kicking out an RC for 0.7.0 tomorrow > morning, and we can land OIDC for the next release, likely an 0.8.0. > > > On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 8:48 AM Bryan Bende wrote: > > > I can be RM for an 0.7.0 registry release. > > > > I spoke with Nathan and he has been making progress on the OIDC support, > > so I will wait a little bit to see if we can get that in, but if it > starts > > taking longer then I'll proceed with getting an RC out. > > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 5:41 AM Pierre Villard < > pierre.villard...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Regarding the NiFi Registry 0.7.0 release - if we can have the OIDC > >> support > >> in it, that would be great. I know Nathan is working on it (based on the > >> JIRA) not sure if this is something close to being ready. > >> > >> Le sam. 4 juil. 2020 à 21:15, Mike Thomsen a > >> écrit : > >> > >> > FYI, if we add in https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/4364 and a PR > to > >> > deprecate the elasticsearch v5 bundle we can free up about 60MB in the > >> > convenience binary. > >> > > >> > On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 10:43 PM Joe Witt wrote: > >> > > >> > > ...and just saw Bryans note. Do we need more work before kicking > out > >> reg > >> > > release? > >> > > > >> > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 7:42 PM Joe Witt wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > 100% same page as Andy. Mark said later this week he will have > some > >> > key > >> > > > bits wrapped. Lets see where we are then. > >> > > > > >> > > > thanks > >> > > > > >> > > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 7:22 PM Andy LoPresto < > alopre...@apache.org> > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > >> Martin, > >> > > >> > >> > > >> I understand everyone is anxious to get their hands on the next > >> > release, > >> > > >> but this thread is exactly how we determine what will be in it. > >> There > >> > > is an > >> > > >> inherent balance in determining which features and fixes need to > be > >> > > >> included to make the release worth it and which will delay it, > and > >> > this > >> > > >> requires being aware of a large percentage of the community’s > >> needs. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> In addition, once a committer has volunteered as release manager > >> > (which > >> > > I > >> > > >> believe Joe has already done for this release), they set the pace > >> and > >> > > will > >> > > >> solicit feedback from the community here. So if Joe replies that > he > >> > > wants > >> > > >> to perform the release process on Monday, any non-critical > tickets > >> > (i.e. > >> > > >> features, non-security bug fixes, etc.) which are not merged will > >> not > >> > go > >> > > >> into 1.12.0. However, we often do wait to perform the release > >> process > >> > > until > >> > > >> specifically enumerated features are reviewed and merged so they > >> can > >> > be > >> > > >> included. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> One way to encourage the timely release of the next version is to > >> > offer > >> > > >> code reviews and other community activities where possible, > because > >> > that > >> > > >> helps move everything forward. In the early days of the project, > >> the > >> > > user > >> > > >> base and the contributor base overlapped highly, and it was > easier > >> to > >> > > >> solicit reviews on all contributions because the majority of the > >> other > >> > > >> active people were also developers. Over the last 5 years, both > the > >> > > >> contributor base and the user base have grown substantially, but > >> the > >> > > user > >> > > >> base has grown far faster than the contributor base. For this > >> reason, > >> > we > >> > > >> have many more people asking for features, releases, etc. than > can > >> > > >> contribute them. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Part of being a community is helping where possible, with the > >> > > >> understanding that not everyone will have the time, expertise, or > >> > > desire to > >> > > >> do all tasks. But the most constructive way to speed the release > >> > > process is > >> > > >> for the outstanding tickets whose inclusion is determined to be > >> > > necessary > >> > > >> to be reviewed and merged. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Andy LoPresto > >> > > >> alopre...@apache.org > >> > > >> alopresto.apa...@gmail.com > >> > > >> He/Him > >> > > >> PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D > EF69 > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > On Jul 2, 2020, at 7:09 PM, Mike Thomsen < > mikerthom...@gmail.com > >> > > >> > > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > ** that's not to say I'll try to hold up a release vote over > it, > >> but > >> > > >> there > >> > > >> > is a good reason behind asking that it be included in the last > >> round > >> > > of > >> > > >> > reviews. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 10:07 PM Mike
