Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/483
For subthasmtp it looks like all that would be needed is to add to our
nifi-assembly/NOTICE an entry such as
(ASLv2) subethasmtp
The following NOTICE information applies
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/483#discussion_r69363256
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-email-bundle/nifi-email-processors/src/test/resources/attachment-only.eml
---
@@ -0,0 +1,156 @@
+Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/584
Hello
Is this PR associated with an Apache NiFi JIRA? If not can you please
create one. Also, we'll want to update the commit message to reference that
JIRA as well. You can see so
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/483
@trixpan i haven't been able to dive into the details of the pr to have
more comments just yet. Hopefully others can engage as well.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
@JPercivall I do agree with @jskora interpretation fwiw.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
nice work on wrapping this stuff up @jskora and @JPercivall !
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
@JPercivall @markap14 here is my two cents in reading this exchange. Joe's
points are really good about what a user expects and would like to see. Mark's
points are true but from a purely
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556#discussion_r68044679
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-media-bundle/nifi-media-processors/src/test/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/image/ExtractImageMetadataTest.java
---
@@ -37,7
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556#discussion_r68041998
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-media-bundle/nifi-media-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/media/ExtractMediaMetadata.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,311
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556#discussion_r68041768
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-media-bundle/nifi-media-processors/src/test/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/image/ExtractImageMetadataTest.java
---
@@ -37,7
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556#discussion_r67966608
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-media-bundle/nifi-media-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/media/ExtractMediaMetadata.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,311
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/543#discussion_r67804042
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/PutTCP.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,290
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/543#discussion_r67801476
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/PutTCP.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,290
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/543#discussion_r67800869
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/PutTCP.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,290
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/543#discussion_r67799555
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/PutTCP.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,290
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/543#discussion_r67732066
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/PutTCP.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,290
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/248#discussion_r67604647
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/UnpackContent.java
---
@@ -154,75
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/543
In my view the demarcator is a good start. A header and footer could be
added later or even just a header could be added and the demarcator could be
considered the footer. Something like that
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/501
@YolandaMDavis can you please be sure to list the key points of the offline
discussion here? Good to capture the outcome but even better to capture the
thinking for the extended community to
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/475
@trixpan @mattyb149 We don't need to aim to cover any or all vendors. If
someone wants to submit a patch for whatever vendor's specific distribution
they want then that is fine provid
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/492#discussion_r66277217
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-evtx-bundle/nifi-evtx-nar/src/main/resources/META-INF/NOTICE
---
@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+nifi-evtx-nar
+Copyright 2016 The
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/397
@olegz definitely was thinking a customValidate check which determined
whether tesseract was ready to roll. If the check you mention does that then
that sounds good. We should be careful about ever
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/397
as long as the processor is invalid and won't start until the
environmentally required bits are present we're good. And yes it is correct we
cannot distribute the dlls in our source releas
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/458
The name isn't great but not sure what would be better. It is indeed a
debugger for the framework and less so for a flow. It is perhaps good to call
it 'CreateChaos'. That said i p
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/492#discussion_r65771143
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-evtx-bundle/nifi-evtx-nar/src/main/resources/META-INF/NOTICE
---
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+nifi-evtx-nar
+Copyright 2016 The
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/492
ok i reviewed the handling of the ported python evtx library. I provided
my suggestions on what I believe would be correct. Given that it was apache
licensed making derived works is fortunately
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/492#discussion_r65770640
--- Diff: NOTICE ---
@@ -7,3 +7,7 @@ The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
This product includes the following work from the Apache
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/492#discussion_r65769425
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-evtx-bundle/nifi-evtx-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/evtx/ParseEvtx.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,353
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/492#discussion_r65769083
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-evtx-bundle/nifi-evtx-nar/src/main/resources/META-INF/NOTICE
---
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+nifi-evtx-nar
+Copyright 2016 The
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/492
regarding Java8 angle obviously that just means this can only go in 1.x
line and not 0.x. That is ok though.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/483
Sounds quite good to me @trixpan . I would just not worry about the
additional attributes - yet. You identified good standard ones and if we find
the need for more then we can iterate. You agree
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/349#discussion_r65388471
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-aws-bundle/nifi-aws-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/aws/iot/PutAWSIoT.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,141
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/474
Please just make sure we don't create problems for old flows. Can change
names if we have a smooth transition for existing EL statements.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/483
I think the behavior you have now is perfect (it should auto decode from
base64) as it honors the user's intent.
As far as tracing to the parent you just need to connect the prove
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/483#discussion_r65358110
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-email-bundle/nifi-email-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/ExtractEmailAttachments.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,190
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/483#discussion_r65352609
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-email-bundle/nifi-email-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/ExtractEmailAttachments.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,190
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/483
Cool! Seems like a great start. Left a couple comments and have a couple
question/comments. Might be a good idea to have more flow file attributes on
the attachment such as any other
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/483#discussion_r65352657
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-email-bundle/nifi-email-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/ExtractEmailAttachments.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,190
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/349
@JPercivall you by chance have bandwidth to keep progressing this with
@KayLerch ?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/397#discussion_r65257585
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-ocr-bundle/nifi-ocr-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/ocr/TesseractOCRProcessor.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,359
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/420#discussion_r64578812
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/pom.xml ---
@@ -235,6 +235,11 @@ language governing permissions and limitations under
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/457#issuecomment-220988156
@bbende i think the move makes sense to improve the lifecycle of when such
issues are detected. However, it does seem like throwing RuntimeExceptions for
those could be
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/453#issuecomment-220190814
For what it is worth @olegz I too prefer to see folks avoid using '-1'
because it is a bit of a blunt instrument in communities like this and there
are good al
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/366#issuecomment-219842672
i certainly agree. this thing has to be one of the most reviewed PRs of
all time. +1 please do merge.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/416#discussion_r63533145
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/util/SCPTransfer.java
---
@@ -0,0
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/416#discussion_r63527657
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/util/SCPTransfer.java
---
@@ -0,0
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/416#discussion_r63524926
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/util/SCPTransfer.java
---
@@ -0,0
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/450#issuecomment-219610061
Appreciate the spirit but this is not something you need RTC for. +1 in
any event.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/430#discussion_r63410760
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-framework-bundle/nifi-framework/nifi-framework-core/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/controller/repository/StandardProcessSession.java
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/416#issuecomment-219503574
@olegz i am not aware of any discussion or decision to avoid adding things
to standard processors. I think for this one it is a perfectly valid place.
For things with
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/430#discussion_r63296926
--- Diff:
nifi-api/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processor/ProcessSession.java ---
@@ -109,6 +109,19 @@
void rollback(boolean penalize
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/430#discussion_r63296904
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-framework-bundle/nifi-framework/nifi-framework-core/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/controller/repository/StandardProcessSession.java
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/430#discussion_r63242199
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/FlowDebugger.java
---
@@ -0,0
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/430#discussion_r63241990
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-framework-bundle/nifi-framework/nifi-framework-core/src/test/java/org/apache/nifi/controller/repository
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/430#discussion_r63241497
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-framework-bundle/nifi-framework/nifi-framework-core/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/controller/repository/StandardProcessSession.java
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/430#discussion_r63239852
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-framework-bundle/nifi-framework/nifi-framework-core/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/controller/repository/StandardProcessSession.java
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/430#discussion_r63239617
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-framework-bundle/nifi-framework/nifi-framework-core/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/controller/repository/StandardProcessSession.java
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/430#discussion_r63238261
--- Diff:
nifi-api/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processor/ProcessSession.java ---
@@ -109,6 +109,19 @@
void rollback(boolean penalize
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/430#discussion_r6323
--- Diff: nifi-assembly/pom.xml ---
@@ -322,6 +322,10 @@ language governing permissions and limitations under
the License. -->
30
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/430#discussion_r63237500
--- Diff:
nifi-api/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processor/ProcessSession.java ---
@@ -109,6 +109,19 @@
void rollback(boolean penalize
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/430#discussion_r63235023
--- Diff:
nifi-api/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processor/AbstractProcessor.java ---
@@ -21,13 +21,19 @@
public abstract class AbstractProcessor extends
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/430#discussion_r63233681
--- Diff: nifi-api/pom.xml ---
@@ -21,5 +21,12 @@
0.7.0-SNAPSHOT
nifi-api
-jar
+jar
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/366#issuecomment-219099819
Am able to build now after rebasing this on top of master. However, the
ignored tests weren't just long running they were also unreliable as shown in
the pre
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/437#issuecomment-218803112
i am certainly a +1 on ignoring this given that it provides a
false-positive test failure making the build unstable. I think this is both
1.0 and 0.x thing.
---
If
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/366#issuecomment-218793849
Tests run: 0, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 441.183 sec
- in org.apache.nifi.processors.kafka.pubsub.ConsumeKafkaTest
Exception
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/366#issuecomment-218787020
[INFO] reporting-task.css (2512b) -> reporting-task.css (1264b)[50%] ->
reporting-task.css.gz (488b)[19%]
Tests run: 5, Failures: 2, Errors: 0, Skipped: 1
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/366#issuecomment-218763305
applying the patch version of this fails.
merging this branch fails.
uto-merging
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-kafka-bundle/nifi-kafka-pubsub-processors/src/test
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/419#issuecomment-217663105
It is expected. The ReportingTask isn't acting on behalf of the user that
started it. It is acting on behalf of NiFi itself and so does have access.
This so
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/349#issuecomment-214778406
Errr..i messed that response up. I meant I agree with the point
@JPercivall was making and understand what @KayLerch was thinking. I think the
names should be
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/349#issuecomment-214775313
I agree with the point @KayLerch made. This processor is not just mqtt but
is mqtt & aws so i think his naming decision makes sense. Good to talk about
the consist
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/239#issuecomment-214591612
certainly @mans2singh - I went ahead and removed the fix version from the
JIRA. Totally understand and thanks.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/366#discussion_r60837830
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-kafka-bundle/nifi-kafka-pubsub-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/kafka/pubsub/PublishKafka.java
---
@@ -0,0
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/366#discussion_r60797930
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-kafka-bundle/nifi-kafka-pubsub-processors/src/test/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/kafka/pubsub
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/366#discussion_r60792649
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-kafka-bundle/nifi-kafka-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/kafka/KafkaPublisher.java
---
@@ -78,152 +81,182
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/366#discussion_r60766260
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-kafka-bundle/nifi-kafka-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/kafka/AbstractKafkaProcessor.java
---
@@ -0,0
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/350#issuecomment-212598568
thanks Oleg. I'd like to review this as part of the larger #366 effort.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appe
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/280#issuecomment-211956655
thanks @markobean and @jskora . What do you think about making ignore
newlines only be honored/supported when not using the new features you're
planning to inclu
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/280#issuecomment-211726456
@jskora do you think this PR can be closed now given the updates made to
fix the underlying defects found? A new PR could be submitted which adds the
proposed features
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/354#issuecomment-211726075
I am less concerned about thread safety of the transforms themselves now.
Jolt's docs do refer to this at the readme level
https://github.com/bazaarvoice/jolt
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/354#issuecomment-211724253
Oleg off-list pointed out the finer concerns with the member variable.
While it seems pretty far out it also seems like it is accurate. In reading
https
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/267#issuecomment-211716593
@jvwing @alopresto Have you had a chance to re-engage on this? It seems
like a reasonable easy-path option for folks just wanting to use some
simple/local username and
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/252#issuecomment-211712568
@jskora I recall there was some discussion where you were considering
supporting this as part of something a bit broader. Is that right or is this
one you think good to
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/239#issuecomment-211711720
Hello @mans2singh . Do you think you'll have a chance to incorporate these
review feedback items?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this emai
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/238#issuecomment-211711025
Anyone in a good position to test/validate this?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/354#issuecomment-211708711
@YolandaMDavis @olegz some feedback.
1. The com.bazaar.jolt... dependency does not appear to be accounted for in
the LICENSE/NOTICE updates. Their LICENSE does
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/360#discussion_r60168086
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-mongodb-bundle/nifi-mongodb-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/mongodb/AbstractMongoProcessor.java
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/188#issuecomment-211702845
@rickysaltzer Looks like there might be a lack of time to focus on this at
this time. How do you feel about closing this PR down for now and revisiting
later?
---
If
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/219#issuecomment-211701587
Commented on NIFI-924 to reference
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1571 and consider this as resolved
by that.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/349#issuecomment-209646256
Hello @KayLerch . Really cool contribution and awesome start. We'll want
to make sure there is an open Apache NiFi JIRA for this and you are more than
welcome to c
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/335#issuecomment-207181902
Hello - thanks for contributing. Some feedback:
- The commit message and the PR will need to associate to some open JIRA.
If the JIRA were say NIFI-XYZ1 then the
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/331#issuecomment-206589245
The author email appears tied to a local system name. Probably not what
you wanted.
There doesn't appear to be updates to the LICENSE/NOTICE of NiFi which
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/254#issuecomment-206581942
I am not sure we can use org.json:json dependency. Its license as found in
the readme of https://github.com/stleary/JSON-java/blob/master/README says
"The li
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/328#discussion_r58706787
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-reporting-tasks/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/controller/MonitorMemory.java
---
@@ -91,12 +92,22
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/325#issuecomment-205522127
@apiri probably best to just be explicit on all the tests about the charset.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/314#discussion_r58008694
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-kafka-bundle/nifi-kafka-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/kafka/StreamScanner.java
---
@@ -55,29 +56,53
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/272#issuecomment-199086549
@pvillard31 If you stay focused on the goal of NIFI-1620 here and avoid the
body manipulation this seems like a good step. Clearly you found a case worthy
of support
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/256#issuecomment-198996892
@adamonduty Saw your tweet.
https://twitter.com/microbatch/status/711618210886340608 I've not worked with
Slack myself but have heard very positive things. We s
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/291#issuecomment-198995171
hmm good find @pvillard31 We need to make the code more locale tolerant
apparently.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/188#issuecomment-198151066
@rickysaltzer hey there. I just realized that this does have a commit
against it post review commentary. My apologies for not engaging. Do you
happen to be using this
Github user joewitt commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/282#discussion_r56345659
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-kafka-bundle/nifi-kafka-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/kafka/GetKafka.java
---
@@ -297,6 +320,14
1 - 100 of 186 matches
Mail list logo
