+1 binding

On Wed, Feb 4, 2026 at 9:19 AM Pierre Villard
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hello Apache NiFi community,
>
> Following the discussion threads on both the dev and users mailing lists 
> [1][2],
> I would like to call a formal vote on the deprecation of NiFi Registry.
>
> This vote will remain open for a minimum of 72 hours.
>
> == SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION ==
>
> The discussion began on January 12, 2026, and received feedback from multiple
> community members including PMC members, committers, and users.
>
> **Reasons for Deprecation:**
> - NiFi Registry has accumulated a significant number of CVEs (double digits)
>   related to its Angular-based frontend that cannot be resolved through simple
>   dependency updates
> - The sub-project has received minimal maintenance attention over the past
>   several years, beyond the UI rewrite effort
> - As a PMC, we have an obligation to respond to CVEs in software we release
>
> **Alternatives Available:**
> - NiFi 2.x introduced Git-based Flow Registry Clients (GitHub, GitLab,
>   Bitbucket, Azure DevOps) that provide direct integration with existing
>   version control infrastructure
> - Kevin Doran, one of the original authors of NiFi Registry, noted that if
>   starting over today, a git repository client-based approach would likely
>   be preferred
> - Future improvements such as NIP-13 (branch support) are planned for
>   git-based clients
>
> **Feature Gaps Identified:**
> - Permission model for multi-tenant deployments (Mark Bean proposed an Access
>   Policy solution for Registry Clients)
> - NAR autoloading from external sources (NIP-4 proposes Extensions Registry
>   Clients as a future solution)
> - Some bugs in GitLab Flow Registry Client being addressed (NIFI-15475)
>
> **Community Feedback:**
> - Kevin Doran, David Handermann, Scott Aslan, Matt Burgess, and Wes Render
>   expressed support for or no objection to the deprecation
> - Shane Ardell and Scott Aslan have made significant progress on the UI
>   rewrite over the past months and expressed willingness to continue
> - No strong objections were raised against deprecation
>
> == PROPOSAL ==
>
> If this vote passes:
>
> 1. NiFi Registry will be marked as deprecated in documentation and codebase
> 2. A deprecation notice will be added to the Apache NiFi website
> 3. A deprecation warning will be displayed in NiFi Registry logs at startup
> 4. A deprecation notice may be added to the NiFi Registry UI via a header 
> banner
> 5. NiFi Registry would be planned for removal as part of NiFi 3.0
>
> == IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS ==
>
> 1. **This decision is REVERSIBLE.** If sufficient contributors step forward to
>    actively maintain and improve NiFi Registry, the deprecation status can be
>    reconsidered and reverted. The deprecation decision could be revisited
>    whenever discussions for NiFi 3 begin.
>
> 2. **The ongoing UI rewrite work should continue regardless of this vote's
>    outcome.** We have a responsibility to address the existing CVEs for 
> software
>    we ship. The work by Shane Ardell and Scott Aslan is appreciated and should
>    be completed.
>
> 3. **There is NO KNOWN TIMELINE for NiFi 3.0.** With major work ongoing for
>    NIP-11 (Connectors) on a development branch, formal steps toward NiFi 3 are
>    not expected until after that feature lands. Any potential removal of NiFi
>    Registry would not happen before NiFi 3.0, giving users significant time to
>    plan migrations.
>
> == VOTE ==
>
> Please cast your vote:
>
> [ ] +1 - I approve the deprecation of NiFi Registry
> [ ]  0 - I have no strong opinion
> [ ] -1 - I do not approve (please provide technical justification)
>
> Per Apache voting guidelines, PMC member votes are binding. Community member
> votes are welcome and encouraged.
>
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/jo7v158k3zr2o93chsm3mh8zkl6lgz8v
> [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/tkp3cdzxwwrhoxp4txx145vfrko91gs3
>
> Thanks,
> Pierre

Reply via email to