I'm also free to review the bundle if you need help. I also don't mind helping with the grunt work of reshaping it into a bundle that can be used with NiFi proper instead of as a special distro.
On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 12:17 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > Andre, > > You're definitely free to do such a thing - it basically sounds like a > 'cyber security focused nifi powered distro' which means largely an > assembly that pulls in cybersecurity specific/relevant extensions and > the base framework. > > You just cannot call that thing 'Apache NiFi/NiFi', need to honor its > marks, and the ASLv2. But otherwise you're pretty much good to go. I > do think you should consider contributing components that are ASLv2 > friendly and for which their might be value in the apache nifi > community directly and I think this is a great example of why we > want/need an extension registry mechanism and path to provide > extensions outside the big bang release. > > Thanks > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Andy LoPresto <alopre...@apache.org> > wrote: > > Andre, > > > > I’m happy to contribute and review code for this distro. I think it’s a > > great idea, and hopefully will be bolstered by the Registry effort where > we > > can make pre-selected NAR groups for different focuses (cybersecurity, > IIoT, > > ML, etc.). > > > > Andy LoPresto > > alopre...@apache.org > > alopresto.apa...@gmail.com > > PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > > > > On Mar 6, 2018, at 12:07 AM, Andre <andre-li...@fucs.org> wrote: > > > > Folks, > > > > I have been privately working on a number of "processors" focused on > > orchestration of cyber security related activities (eg update firewall > > rules with data provided via an HTTP endpoint) etc. > > > > While some of these tasks can be easily solved with generic NiFi > components > > or with little (or no custom processors at all) truth is that most > security > > practitioners just don't get it. > > > > Result is that unless you show up with a processor called UpdateCiscoAcl > > (random example), people's brains just melt. > > > > I have been considering spinning up a separate project, based on a cut > down > > version of NiFi, that will employ the base framework towards this > specific > > use case by publishing specific processors that generally do not appeal > to > > the rest of the crowd. > > > > My base rationale is the following: > > > > - Reduce the need to add processors to the master tree and require people > > to review processors that are of very limited use outside specific > contexts. > > - Improve overall user experience for this particular use case > > - Reduce impact to the NiFi brand by the release of code that errr, may > not > > be up to the standards of my fellow committers ;-) > > > > Given my position as a PMC member and profound respect to all of you, I > > would like to reach out to the rest of the team for you overall thoughts > > about this? > > > > Looking forward to hearing from you. > > > > >