Joe, thanks for your help. You all have been very helpful - it's a joy to work together with you.
As you may or may not know, my main project is the RuleEngine. I started development about 9 years ago (with breaks in between...). So I created a standalone ruleengine in Java which works in any Java application, web apps or Java based script languages. A while ago I wrote a plugin for the Pentaho ETL Tool (called PDI or Kettle). It is available through the Pentaho Marketplace. I have presented the plugin itself and the idea behind it at various events and by now at least two larger companies that I know of are using it. My latest work was to use the ruleengine in Hadoop mapreduce (you can read about it in my blog) and another candidate I would like to work on is Kafka. The idea is always the same: Have the business logic outside of the tool or application, so that the IT code or tool is slim and clean. This directly relates to more agile development, easier maintenance and thus higher quality (and less errors). And it promotes the devision of responsibilities: the IT expert for the system and code and the business expert for the business logic/rules. I hope I can contribute to Nifi in a way that it helps others. I was amazed (really) when I first saw Nifi and quickly came up with the Apache Velocity Template Merge processor. But then I lost a little bit the focus doing other things and I did not really have a use case for Nifi. But now I have started using it again and hope to also introduce it at the company I work for. My goal would be to implement it this year. Again thanks for the help and I will certainly need more until we have a final version - all the little bits and pieces that need to be observed... Rgds, Uwe > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 02. März 2017 um 22:07 Uhr > Von: "Joe Witt" <joe.w...@gmail.com> > An: users@nifi.apache.org > Betreff: Re: Re: Re: Re: new Nifi Processors > > Uwe > > To progress toward a pull request for inclusion in the nifi community > we will need a LICENSE/NOTICE to end up in the nar bundle itself. You > can see many examples of this in other nars such as [1] > > If you don't need to edit the LICENSE you can not provide it and a > default one will be provided. Same for NOTICE. The learning curve on > proper licensing is not pleasant and we're in all the license struggle > together so we can help get it right. > > You're doing some really cool work here. Will be awesome if we can > work with you to get the things you'd like contributed into formal > contribution/PR status. Certainly you don't have to do that and can > instead just publish them outside the nifi community. We're happy to > help either way. > > [1] > https://github.com/apache/nifi/tree/master/nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-ignite-bundle/nifi-ignite-nar/src/main/resources/META-INF > > Thanks > Joe > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Uwe Geercken <uwe.geerc...@web.de> wrote: > > Thanks for all your resposes and help. > > > > One last question (at least for the moment ;-) ): > > > > Should I place a license file in the nar file? Or is it enough to place it > > in the code? Any conventions from the Apache side? > > > > Rgds, > > > > Uwe > > > > > >> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 02. März 2017 um 15:53 Uhr > >> Von: "Matt Burgess" <mattyb...@apache.org> > >> An: users@nifi.apache.org > >> Betreff: Re: Re: Re: new Nifi Processors > >> > >> Uwe, > >> > >> If your NAR can be licensed under the Apache Software License 2.0, > >> then you shouldn't run into any issues with other folks want to > >> package your software, they can even package it up and license it > >> under a commercial (paid) license; the ASL 2.0 is pretty permissive. > >> There are some patent protections in there, as well as some rules > >> about explicitly specifying any code you've changed, and rules about > >> use of the project name (like you can't sell a version of NiFi with > >> your additional NAR and call it "NiFi++"). > >> > >> Regards, > >> Matt > >> > >> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 7:10 AM, Uwe Geercken <uwe.geerc...@web.de> wrote: > >> > Thanks Andrew, > >> > > >> > Matt also pointed me to the same direction. > >> > > >> > But my question is, what if I switch to the Apache license model and some > >> > other software or distribution wants to package my software and they use > >> > a > >> > different licence model. Will I have a similar problem there? Do you > >> > know? > >> > > >> > I will spend some time on the topic on the weekend... > >> > > >> > Rgds, > >> > > >> > Uwe > >> > > >> > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 02. März 2017 um 05:06 Uhr > >> > Von: "Andrew Grande" <apere...@gmail.com> > >> > An: users@nifi.apache.org > >> > Betreff: Re: Re: new Nifi Processors > >> > > >> > Basically the GPL license puts restrictions on how one can distribute in > >> > practical terms. Meaning your work may live under GPL license as long as > >> > it's not part of the official package. End users will have to download > >> > your > >> > NAR themselves. > >> > > >> > Andrew > >> > > >> > > >> > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017, 8:43 AM Matt Burgess <mattyb...@apache.org> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Uwe, > >> >> > >> >> Sorry for misspeaking, by "official Apache NiFi repo" I meant the > >> >> Apache NiFi codebase (the "built-in" processors, e.g.). For the > >> >> licensing part, if you distribute something with GPL binary > >> >> dependencies, I believe the entire distribution must be licensed as > >> >> GPL or something GPL-compatible. This is not a bad thing, but due to > >> >> Apache licensing, such a processor could not be accepted as-is into > >> >> the NiFi codebase. Even LGPL binary dependencies are not allowed. > >> >> However as you have made your processor available via your own repo, > >> >> the community is free to download and use your processor under the > >> >> terms of your license. However if someone packaged up a NiFi > >> >> distribution with a GPL-licensed processor (for example), they would > >> >> not be allowed to distribute that package under an Apache 2.0 license; > >> >> rather I believe the whole package would have to be licensed under the > >> >> GPL. > >> >> > >> >> I am no licensing expert by any means, but I have had experience with > >> >> these kinds of things, both for NiFi and other extensible open-source > >> >> projects. > >> >> > >> >> Regards, > >> >> Matt > >> >> > >> >> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 7:01 AM, Uwe Geercken <uwe.geerc...@web.de> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > Matt, > >> >> > > >> >> > I did not know there is an official Apache Nifi repo. If you send me a > >> >> > link, I will have a look. > >> >> > > >> >> > Also, is there an official way of tagging, annotating or otherwise > >> >> > documenting the license model for a processor? At which point in the > >> >> > code, > >> >> > documentation do I have to place license information? > >> >> > > >> >> > I will check if the Apache license fits to my personal ideas of how my > >> >> > software should be protected. I am not a license expert, so I will > >> >> > have to > >> >> > spend some time to understand what that means. Also I need to check > >> >> > what it > >> >> > means for the software (and current users) if I change the license > >> >> > model. > >> >> > > >> >> > Anyway, this is still a first version of the processors. So they will > >> >> > mature over time and I hope at that point the extension registry is > >> >> > there. > >> >> > > >> >> > In general - as you know Matt - I am creating open source software > >> >> > (since 2000). I believe in the idea of open source and of sharing for > >> >> > the > >> >> > benefit of all of us. > >> >> > > >> >> > If I can, I will adjust whatever is necessary, so that the license is > >> >> > not a hurdle for using the processors. Nifi is a really great product > >> >> > and I > >> >> > still remember my first impression when I saw it..... > >> >> > > >> >> > Greetings, > >> >> > > >> >> > Uwe > >> >> > > >> >> >> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 01. März 2017 um 03:56 Uhr > >> >> >> Von: "Matt Burgess" <mattyb...@apache.org> > >> >> >> An: users@nifi.apache.org > >> >> >> Betreff: Re: new Nifi Processors > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Uwe G has made his processors available (thank you!) via his own repo > >> >> >> vs the official Apache NiFi repo; this may be directly related to > >> >> >> your > >> >> >> point about licensing. Having said that, he is of course at liberty > >> >> >> to license those separate processors as he sees fit (assuming it is > >> >> >> also in accordance with the licenses he has employed). Apache NiFi > >> >> >> welcomes to its codebase Apache-friendly contributions (FAQ [1]), but > >> >> >> alternatively and even before an Extension Registry [2] is supported, > >> >> >> authors can make their NiFi processors and such available under the > >> >> >> appropriate licenses. If there are commercial (or other) entities > >> >> >> looking to package such extensions with the official Apache NiFi > >> >> >> distribution, they would be subject to the same terms of the License > >> >> >> & > >> >> >> Notice (L&N) of Apache NiFi as well as whatever extensions are added. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Regards, > >> >> >> Matt > >> >> >> > >> >> >> [1] https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html > >> >> >> [2] > >> >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NIFI/Extension+Repositories+%28aka+Extension+Registry%29+for+Dynamically-loaded+Extensions > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:33 PM, Angry Duck Studio > >> >> >> <angryduckstu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> > Hi, Uwe, > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > These look useful. However, typically custom processors are either > >> >> >> > Apache > >> >> >> > 2.0 or MIT licensed. These don't seem to specify a license, but > >> >> >> > your > >> >> >> > business rule engine (jare) seems to be GPL 3.0 licensed. I'm not > >> >> >> > sure that > >> >> >> > fits with most uses of NiFi. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Can you please clarify? > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Thanks > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > -Matt > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Uwe Geercken <uwe.geerc...@web.de> > >> >> >> > wrote: > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Hello everyone, > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> I just wanted to let you know, that I have created four processors > >> >> >> >> for > >> >> >> >> Nifi > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> 1) GenerateData - generates random data (test data) based on word > >> >> >> >> lists, > >> >> >> >> regular expressions or purely random > >> >> >> >> 2) RuleEngine - a ruleengine which allows to process complex > >> >> >> >> business > >> >> >> >> logic. But the logic is maintained in a separate web app and thus > >> >> >> >> outside of > >> >> >> >> the flow. If the logic changes the flow does NOT have to change. > >> >> >> >> 3) SplitToAttribute - splits a single CSV row into flow file > >> >> >> >> attributes > >> >> >> >> 4) MergeTemplate - merges flow file attributes with an Apache > >> >> >> >> Velocity > >> >> >> >> template and writes the result to the flow file content > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Please give them a try and let me know your findings and thoughts. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> https://github.com/uwegeercken/nifi_processors > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> rgds, > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Uwe > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >
