Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1614
also please note there seem to be an unrelated issue affecting another test
unit that fails unter pt_BR and fr_FR but passes ja_JP. I suspect it is a comma
vs dot number notation issue
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1614
please ignore the last comment regarding the error above, seems to be a
rebasing issue.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1622
@mcgilman I suspected I could be missing something. Thanks for the
clarification and improvement. Happy for you to merge
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1625
@apiri good catch. I wasn't aware of that feature. I pushed a modified
version. let me know what you think
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1625
I am obviously happy to remove the pre-build cache "rm -rf" but since it
should not return error, so I reckon we can leave it there as a safety
mechanism in case before_cache fails
-
GitHub user trixpan opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1639
NIFI-1939 - Correct issue where ParseSyslog was unable to parse RFC31â¦
â¦64 messages containg an IPv6 address as source
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache NiFi
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1639
@bbende - would you be able to have a look on this one?
Cheers
---
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
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1619
no worries. rebased
---
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 this feature
enabled and wishes so
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1016
@brianburnett there's a minor conflict but I am more concerned with
consistent failures when I run the test units?
Have you been able to build this with `-Pcontrib-check` ?
---
If your
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1595
@jdye64 can you please solve the conflicts?
Cheers!
---
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
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1595
:rofl:
---
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 this feature
enabled and wishes so
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1640
@mattyb149 - should be all goody now
---
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 this feature
enabled
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1644
@mcgilman - I gave it a try in finding a solution. Happy to adjust in case
you think it is needed.
Cheers
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
GitHub user trixpan opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1644
NIFI-11 - Capture StringIndexOutOfBoundsException to prevent failed eâ¦
â¦valuations from disrupting flow
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache NiFi.
In order
GitHub user trixpan opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1642
NIFI-1336 - Ensure that flowfiles are penalized upon exception due toâ¦
⦠inability to delete hold
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache NiFi.
In order to streamline
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1643
@olegz could you have a look on this when you have time?
Cheers
---
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 trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1619
@apiri - Added the note. Please certainly link to PerformanceConsider. As
you may recall earlier this week while coding this processor I posted a message
around the very same issue: It would
Github user trixpan closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1622
---
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 this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1642
@markap14 hope this PR addresses the issue you reported. Could you confirm
and merge/provide feedback?
Cheers!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have
GitHub user trixpan opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1643
ST-2702 - Deprecates nifi-standard-bundle/*JMS and document the recomâ¦
â¦mended alternative
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache NiFi.
In order to streamline
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1622
closing as requested by @mcgilman
---
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 this feature
enabled
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1595
From a first look the code seems ok but I have a quick question:
Do we truly need a permission denied relationship? It seems like a
deviation from the general nature of failure relationships
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1595
Glad you managed to get the lines out of their conflict... ð will
review
---
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 trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1608
Shouldn't `static final AllowableValue MODE_MULTIFILE` ... be updated to
reflect new behavior?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1608#discussion_r110654924
--- Diff:
nifi-mock/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/util/StandardProcessorTestRunner.java
---
@@ -36,9 +36,9 @@
import java.util.Objects;
import
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1546
@scottyaslan - have you tested this?
http://jsfiddle.net/Ldr07h2r/6/
Source:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/25822682/webkit-text-security-compatibility
---
If your project
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1546
The approach linked above seems to work on chrome without the javascript
but firefox required the js code.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1546
forget it. Seen what @mcgilman was referring to. Possible to play with text
area but it becomes single line. :-(
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1390
@brosander sorry for the delay but now it seems like this PR has merge
conflicts.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1568
@ijokarumawak thanks for fixing this. merged
---
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 this feature
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1306
@ijokarumawak sorry for the delay but it seems this needs rebasing. :-(
---
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
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1364
@brosander are you still planning to review this at some stage? Happy to
try to help if needed.
Cheers!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1016
hey @brianburnett thank you for submiting a new commit.
You seem to have merged the mater into your PR? You should have instead
rebased the PR to master.
Please refer
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1553
Thanks for the assistance previously, it should be ready for review.
---
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
GitHub user trixpan opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1563
NIFI- - Renames jBcrypt dependency to jBCrypt
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache NiFi.
In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
to ensure
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1581
@apsaltis LGTM but is there chance of making reference to proxyuser groups/
proxyuser hosts in the description or additional info? HDFS Impersonation is
one of those thing people always get wrong
Github user trixpan closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1563
---
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 this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1563
merged pere's patch
---
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 this feature
enabled and wishes so
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1551
@joewitt thanks for your comments.
I understand your concerns but isn't the user change of the default
settings (we do ship with default location settings after all) a voluntary
action
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1551
@joewitt. Thanks for the comment. I will go through your notes and adjust
the PR accordingly.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1553#discussion_r104021856
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/test/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/TestPutEmail.java
---
@@ -230,27
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1553#discussion_r104027407
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/test/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/TestPutEmail.java
---
@@ -230,27
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1553#discussion_r104113002
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/test/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/TestPutEmail.java
---
@@ -230,27
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1553#discussion_r104114824
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/test/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/TestPutEmail.java
---
@@ -230,27
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1553#discussion_r104143931
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/test/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/TestPutEmail.java
---
@@ -230,27
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1553#discussion_r104170950
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/test/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/TestPutEmail.java
---
@@ -230,27
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1418#discussion_r103599319
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-lumberjack-bundle/nifi-lumberjack-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/lumberjack/ListenLumberjack.java
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1418#discussion_r103599241
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-beats-bundle/nifi-beats-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/beats/frame/BeatsDecoder.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,330
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1553#discussion_r104027988
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/test/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/TestPutEmail.java
---
@@ -102,13
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1543
@joetrite is there a chance you can squash this commit into a single commit?
---
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 trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1619
@apiri?
---
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 this feature
enabled and wishes so
GitHub user trixpan opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1640
NIFI-3222 - Allow ExecuteScript to use ExpressionLangugage to define â¦
â¦the scripting engine modules path
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache NiFi.
In order
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1640
fair enough. will do both
---
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 this feature
enabled and wishes
GitHub user trixpan opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2016
NIFI-4196 - Expose AWS proxy authentication settings
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache NiFi.
In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
to ensure
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2016
Please note the displayName settings were not added as most of the AWS
related processors lack these
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1644
@mcgilman - Sorry for the delay.
rebased and hopefully addressed the jUnit issue
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
GitHub user trixpan opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2017
NIFI-4197 - Expose some proxy settings to GCS Processors
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache NiFi.
In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
GitHub user trixpan opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2018
NIFI-4175 - Add HTTP proxy support to *SFTP processors
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache NiFi.
In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
to ensure
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1696
@jfrazee I resolved conflict with master (unrelated to the change).
I would agree that the "text" qualifier was indeed missing. Fixed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1696
@jfrazee?
---
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 this feature
enabled and wishes so
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2022
@pvillard31 - I assume the processor should be able to control nifi
components only. Should we rename it to make this explicit?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2018#discussion_r128152991
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/util/SFTPTransfer.java
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2016
hopefully fixed
---
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 this feature
enabled and wishes so
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1968
LGTM
---
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 this feature
enabled and wishes so
GitHub user trixpan opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2013
NIFI-4098 - Adjust ParseCEF to re-use bean validator in order to imprâ¦
â¦ove performance
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache NiFi.
In order to streamline the review
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1921
@pvillard31 I accept it is a bit of bit picking but is there any chance we
call it _raw? IIRC this is the name we used on ParseCEF. Naming conventions
make user experience smoother ð
---
If your
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1692#discussion_r113340505
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-cybersecurity-bundle/nifi-cybersecurity-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/cybersecurity/CompareFuzzyHash.java
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1650#discussion_r113340946
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-enrich-bundle/nifi-enrich-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/GeoEnrichIP.java
---
@@ -208,6 +120,8
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1650#discussion_r113411154
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-enrich-bundle/nifi-enrich-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/GeoEnrichIP.java
---
@@ -70,6 +55,7
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1650#discussion_r113431000
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-enrich-bundle/nifi-enrich-processors/src/test/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/TestISPEnrichIP.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,310
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1650#discussion_r113428044
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-enrich-bundle/nifi-enrich-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/ISPEnrichIP.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,132
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1696
@joewitt - When doing this change I noticed some changes to HL7 files and
looking online it seems like HL7 uses CR as a "segment separator".
Would you mind if I renamed the rele
GitHub user trixpan opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1696
NIFI-1655 - Add .gitattributes to specifically define
the line ending format of particular file type (i.e. .java =
LF, .bat=CRLF)
Thank you for submitting a contribution
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1692#discussion_r113462423
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-cybersecurity-bundle/nifi-cybersecurity-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/cybersecurity/CompareFuzzyHash.java
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1692#discussion_r113462459
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-cybersecurity-bundle/nifi-cybersecurity-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/cybersecurity/CompareFuzzyHash.java
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1692#discussion_r113462407
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-cybersecurity-bundle/nifi-cybersecurity-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/cybersecurity/CompareFuzzyHash.java
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1692#discussion_r113463146
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-cybersecurity-bundle/nifi-cybersecurity-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/cybersecurity/CompareFuzzyHash.java
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1692
@alopresto - I put together the interface based approach and indeed it
seems a much cleaner code so thank you for pointing me into this direction.
The code has not been optimised and still
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1692#discussion_r113586323
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-cybersecurity-bundle/nifi-cybersecurity-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/cybersecurity/CompareFuzzyHash.java
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1692#discussion_r113586627
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-cybersecurity-bundle/nifi-cybersecurity-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/cybersecurity/CompareFuzzyHash.java
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1692#discussion_r113585822
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-cybersecurity-bundle/nifi-cybersecurity-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/cybersecurity/CompareFuzzyHash.java
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1692#discussion_r113585955
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-cybersecurity-bundle/nifi-cybersecurity-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/cybersecurity/CompareFuzzyHash.java
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1692#discussion_r113587423
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-cybersecurity-bundle/nifi-cybersecurity-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/cybersecurity/FuzzyHashContent.java
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1639#discussion_r114039631
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/ParseSyslog.java
---
@@ -57,13
GitHub user trixpan opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1718
NIFI-391 - Introduce the ability to deprecate a component
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache NiFi.
In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
GitHub user trixpan opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1692
NIFI-3726 - Introduces CompareFuzzyHash processor
- Abstract FuzzyhashContent to reduce a bit of code
duplication
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1692
@apiri and now the comparison processor!!
For the record: I tried to illustrate the potential of the processor by
using two of the NiFi own 'pom.xml' and displaying how despite lack of 1
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1608
@pvillard31 sorry for this but it seems PR is now in conflict with master.
Would you mind rebasing?
Cheers
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1016
@brianburnett still not rebased correctly. My suggestion is to do again the
trick of branching from the master
git checkout master -b nifi-2724v3
git cherry-pick your commit hash
git
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1395#discussion_r113209753
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/PostHTTP.java
---
@@ -880,6
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1395
@nickcarenza thanks for the PR, much appreciated.
I was going through it and got myself wondering:
Is there any reason why we are doing this when InvokeHTTP processor cater
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1642
@markap14 no worries. Thanks for the clarification I will try to give it
another go.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1644
@mcgilman makes total sense. Will adjust
---
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 this feature
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1716
@jonashartwig thank you for your contribution.
I was looking at your code and was wondering if have you had a chance to
see the put / fetch parquet @bbende submitted a few hours ago
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1716
Speed and overall project roadmap.
The approach introduced there brings significant advantages to the use of
PutHDFS.
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1712
---
If your
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1692#discussion_r113932077
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-cybersecurity-bundle/nifi-cybersecurity-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/cybersecurity/FuzzyHashContent.java
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1692#discussion_r113917927
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-cybersecurity-bundle/nifi-cybersecurity-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/cybersecurity/CompareFuzzyHash.java
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1692#discussion_r113918024
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-cybersecurity-bundle/nifi-cybersecurity-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/cybersecurity/CompareFuzzyHash.java
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1693
@andrewmlim :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: for catching 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 project does not have
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1738
The people from the future salute you, oh fellow space traveler!
LGTM. And works on GMT+11.
Suggest waiting for travis to complete to ensure it runs on other Time
zones (I assume you
501 - 600 of 658 matches
Mail list logo
