tpalfy commented on pull request #5692: URL: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/5692#issuecomment-1020467938
I understand what this approach would achieve and how. What I'm trying to say is that the ```nifi-dbcp-shared``` would hold a full-fledged service all the rest. It wouldn't look like a utility module. And about the general issue - we have code duplications instead of this approach already. Why is this so case so different? That being said, maybe we could do something that is technically the same but the concept is a bit different. We split the ```nifi-dbcp-service``` into to modules. One can remain ```nifi-dbcp-service``` and holds the code and we can have a ```nifi-dbcp-service-meta``` module that can have the META-INF. I understand that in this case the result would basically be the same but with this we can create a pattern that can be used generally for any future or existing module allow us to reuse any implementation code. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@nifi.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
