Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

NIFI-13394: Check candidate virtual env for python command. #8961

Closed
wants to merge 5 commits into from

Conversation

bobpaulin
Copy link
Contributor

Summary

NIFI-13394

Tracking

Please complete the following tracking steps prior to pull request creation.

Issue Tracking

Pull Request Tracking

  • Pull Request title starts with Apache NiFi Jira issue number, such as NIFI-00000
  • Pull Request commit message starts with Apache NiFi Jira issue number, as such NIFI-00000

Pull Request Formatting

  • Pull Request based on current revision of the main branch
  • Pull Request refers to a feature branch with one commit containing changes

Verification

Please indicate the verification steps performed prior to pull request creation.

Built and started up on windows with python modules.

Build

  • Build completed using mvn clean install -P contrib-check
    • JDK 21

Licensing

  • New dependencies are compatible with the Apache License 2.0 according to the License Policy
  • New dependencies are documented in applicable LICENSE and NOTICE files

Documentation

  • Documentation formatting appears as expected in rendered files

Copy link
Contributor

@exceptionfactory exceptionfactory left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for working on this @bobpaulin. The concept makes sense, but for null-safety, I recommend reworking the command resolution a bit.

Copy link
Contributor

@exceptionfactory exceptionfactory left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the updates @bobpaulin. The new method looks cleaner, but the unit tests are now failing, so it looks like some additional changes are required.

Copy link
Contributor

@exceptionfactory exceptionfactory left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for working through the feedback @bobpaulin, the latest version looks good! +1 merging

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants