[jira] [Commented] (NIFI-5154) Out of Scope processors can block Controller Services

["ASF GitHub Bot (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-5154?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16464270#comment-16464270 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on NIFI-5154:
--------------------------------------

GitHub user markap14 opened a pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2678

    NIFI-5154: When Processor or Controller Service is added to a Process…

    … Group, remove any references from it to any other Controller Service that is not reachable from the newly assigned Process Group
    
    Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache NiFi.
    
    In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
    to ensure the following steps have been taken:
    
    ### For all changes:
    - [ ] Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? Is it referenced 
         in the commit message?
    
    - [ ] Does your PR title start with NIFI-XXXX where XXXX is the JIRA number you are trying to resolve? Pay particular attention to the hyphen "-" character.
    
    - [ ] Has your PR been rebased against the latest commit within the target branch (typically master)?
    
    - [ ] Is your initial contribution a single, squashed commit?
    
    ### For code changes:
    - [ ] Have you ensured that the full suite of tests is executed via mvn -Pcontrib-check clean install at the root nifi folder?
    - [ ] Have you written or updated unit tests to verify your changes?
    - [ ] If adding new dependencies to the code, are these dependencies licensed in a way that is compatible for inclusion under [ASF 2.0](http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a)? 
    - [ ] If applicable, have you updated the LICENSE file, including the main LICENSE file under nifi-assembly?
    - [ ] If applicable, have you updated the NOTICE file, including the main NOTICE file found under nifi-assembly?
    - [ ] If adding new Properties, have you added .displayName in addition to .name (programmatic access) for each of the new properties?
    
    ### For documentation related changes:
    - [ ] Have you ensured that format looks appropriate for the output in which it is rendered?
    
    ### Note:
    Please ensure that once the PR is submitted, you check travis-ci for build issues and submit an update to your PR as soon as possible.


You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

    $ git pull https://github.com/markap14/nifi NIFI-5154

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

    https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2678.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

    This closes #2678
    
----
commit 2034757ef1b4f9fccd42552f521d940d8372354b
Author: Mark Payne <ma...@...>
Date:   2018-05-04T18:48:53Z

    NIFI-5154: When Processor or Controller Service is added to a Process Group, remove any references from it to any other Controller Service that is not reachable from the newly assigned Process Group

----


> Out of Scope processors can block Controller Services
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: NIFI-5154
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-5154
>             Project: Apache NiFi
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Core Framework
>            Reporter: Mark Payne
>            Assignee: Mark Payne
>            Priority: Major
>             Fix For: 1.7.0
>
>
> On root canvas level PG1 and PG2 are created. User1 and user2 have access to PG1 while only user2 has access to PG2. User1 or user 2 creates a processor and corresponding CS in PG1. At this time both user1 and user2 can disable and modify that CS. User2 then copies the processor referencing that CS in PG1. That snippet is then pasted inside of PG2. Since PG2 is not a sub process group of PG1 the CS referenced in that copied snippet by UUID is out of scope for that pasted processor. The CS in PG1 still sees that referencing processor from PG2 and now user1 can no longer disable and modify the CS in PG1.
> The pasted processor is clearly out of scope of referenced CS. The processor would still present as invalid when pasted and still reference the CS's UUID in its snippet until property was updated or until processor was moved to a new location that was within scope of the CS. The fix here would be to make sure the CS does not reference any processors that are out of scope. So in this specific scenario it would not block.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)