Peter I don’t see anything wrong with having an equivalent extras sort of location provided it is for extensions only and for those that have problematic binary dependencies and for which we would not publish any binary artifacts. Having problematic source dependencies are still out.
This is also an area where an extension registry will really shine. So it’s awesome to see the progress with the registry work. Thanks Joe On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 8:18 PM Peter Wicks (pwicks) <pwi...@micron.com> wrote: > We have a number of CIFS networks shares that I've been denied permission > to mount on my NiFi Linux server. > In the past I've accessed similar shares by running NiFi on a Windows > server and then pushing the files using Site-to-Site, but I'd rather avoid > that if I can. In the past those Windows servers were already available, > but I don't want to setup new servers just to perform this duty. > > The Hortonworks article I found online did it using two servers also: > https://community.hortonworks.com/articles/26089/windows-share-nifi-hdfs-a-practical-guide.htm > > I looked into adding CIFS support to the *File processors, but the only > library I could find was jCIFS, which is licensed as LGPL... Apache Camel > works around this licensing limitation by pointing users to the "Camel > Extra" project, which is not officially an Apache project, and is not > distributed as part of Camel http://camel.apache.org/jcifs.html. > >