GitHub user rbutterfield opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/73
[A-946]: Updating bootstrap.conf
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/Asymmetrik/incubator-nifi A-946
Alternatively you can
Github user danbress commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/72#issuecomment-130674437
Yu,
Thanks for working through this. There are a few things I still think
you need to do:
1) I made comments on line 70 and 61 that I think you need to
Thanks for the write up, the proposal looks great. I imagine moving towards
a standardization on using Avro for record centric FlowFiles will make
writing future processors a lot easier, too. All of the proposed
requirements seem doable without too much trouble.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 10:26 AM,
Ryan,
The down side to that approach is that you're tying up that thread from the
thread pool when you call sleep.
Typically, in a situation like this, where you want to 'pause' processing for a
bit, you would call ProcessContext.yield() and then return.
This causes the framework not to
All,
Am filing the infra tickets now. I forgot that we had 'nifi-site' at
the root level too. So requesting two new git repositories in Apache
Infra. Will not be asking to have them mirrored to Github as it
doesn't seem worth it/necessary.
'nifi-maven'
What is the current distinction between master and develop? Master is
stable and develop is where new changes go? The reason I suggest just
having master is that it follows the convention that other projects use.
Master is where new development happens and releases or more stable
branches are
Resending
On Aug 13, 2015 12:22 PM, Joe Witt joe.w...@gmail.com wrote:
Team,
It was proposed by Ryan Blue on another thread that we consider
dropping the master vs develop distinction. In the interest of his,
in my view, very good point I didn't want it to get buried in that
thread.
[1]
I have always stayed away from doing any threading inside a NiFi processor.
However, I recently came across a use-case where I'm calling a web service
from within a custom Nifi Processor and I don't want to overwhelm the web
service.
I'd like to instrument a sleep in the onTrigger() or process()
Team,
It was proposed by Ryan Blue on another thread that we consider
dropping the master vs develop distinction. In the interest of his,
in my view, very good point I didn't want it to get buried in that
thread.
[1] is the thread when we last discussed gitflow/develop/master on
entry to the
I think you can change what branch is checked out by default by updating
remote/HEAD?
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Joe Witt joe.w...@gmail.com wrote:
Nope. That is just what is shown in github as the default.
On Aug 13, 2015 4:15 PM, Dan Bress dbr...@onyxconsults.com wrote:
+0. Our
Ryan,
When you call ProcessContext.yield(), all that does is tell the framework not
to schedule you for a bit.
So you can call it from anywhere. But the current thread will continue on. So
the thread can return or can finish its job.
Thanks
-Mark
If we worked on master and had a prod branch that was the last release,
then we have the same thing we do now, just with different names. This
would be GitLab Flow as Brandon pointed out.
That being said, I don't have experience with the release process, and
maybe the prod branch does not provide
It's really a principle and style preference. Each of the git workflows
have pros/cons, but they are each viable. There's nothing that says that
gitflow is superior to other workflows.
Gitflow has the unique advantage that, by default, master only has exactly
the finished product tags on it,
NiFi Gurus,
Regarding Controller Services, I'm seeing some strange behavior regarding a
custom Controller Service only showing its ID in a Processor and was
wondering if anyone's encountered similar issues. Seeing this on the
latest develop branch, 0.3.0-SNAPSHOT.
Steps taken:
1. Create
+0. Our default branch is set to 'develop', so when you clone apache-nifi from
git, you are automatically looking at the 'develop' branch, right? To me, this
is a straight forward indicator of where I should be working.
I thought we set this up a little while ago to avoid the confusion?
Dan
So sounds like we can set the default to develop whenever it is
cloned. That is a good start. We still have to articulate that we
have 'master' and 'develop' and help folks understand why.
So on that second part, let's help ourselves understand 'why' for our
own community. For me that is what
Ryan,
Having develop and master was due to the influence of git flow [1].
[1] http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Joey Echeverria joe...@gmail.com wrote:
Currently master is the same as the last release tag.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 1:51
Bryan
Very cool. I would definitely want to get Ryan Blue's thoughts as the
originator of that nar but I think it makes sense to move non-kite
specific items to this potentially new 'nifi-avro-nar' and then rename
the current nar to 'nifi-kite-nar' with it retaining the kite specific
pieces.
18 matches
Mail list logo
