What versions Russ? On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 10:15 AM Russell Bateman <r...@windofkeltia.com> wrote:
> We don't use a separate Git repository; only the simple solution the > NiFi Registry offers. > Maybe someday we'll go further, but, in the meantime, It's super useful > to us so we hope > never to see it disappear. > > Thanks, > Russ Bateman > > On 3/4/25 08:44, David Handermann wrote: > > Team, > > > > For more than two years, the NiFi Registry project has received > > minimal maintenance attention. This is apparent from a review of > > commits related to the nifi-registry directory [1], the majority of > > which are incremental dependency version upgrades. As project > > maintainers, we need to decide on a support strategy going forward. > > > > The lack of maintenance for NiFi Registry is clear when reviewing > > important elements of the project itself. On the frontend, this > > includes Angular 11, which is no longer supported, and last updated > > over three years ago. Other issues include a historical approach to > > application token management, which NiFi itself changed in version > > 1.15.0, and legacy integration with OpenID Connect. Current community > > work has focused on direct integration with Git-based Flow Registry > > Clients, including GitHub, GitLab, and BitBucket. With the Flow > > Registry Client as an extension point itself, the NiFi framework is > > effectively decoupled from NiFi Registry as the solution for version > > control of flow definitions. > > > > The NiFi Registry project previously existed in a separate repository > > until 2021 [2], and at the time, there were some advantages to > > co-locating projects. With the decoupling of the client interface, > > however, there seems to be little value in continuing to maintain the > > project in the same repository. > > > > With minimal maintenance over multiple years, we should seriously > > consider deprecating NiFi Registry for removal. As an intermediate > > step, however, moving NiFi Registry back to a separate repository > > would have multiple benefits. It would focus the maintenance concerns > > for NiFi and NiFi Registry independently, clarifying where work is > > happening, and where it is needed. It would also provide the > > opportunity for focused improvements to NiFi Registry, if there is > > remaining support for it among project PMC members and committers. > > > > I'm willing to put in the work to decouple the projects, so it would > > be helpful to get some feedback from the community, and from active > > contributors in particular, about future maintenance for NiFi > > Registry. > > > > Regards, > > David Handermann > > > > [1]https://github.com/apache/nifi/commits/main/nifi-registry > > [2]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-8528 >
