Allow deployment of newer NiFi Registry Client types

[ChrisSamo632]

Is your feature request related to a problem?

NiFi Registry Clients deployed by NiFiKop are currently limited to the original "NiFi Registry" type

Describe the solution you'd like to see

Support newer types of Registry Client, e.g. GitHub, GitLab, BitBucket

Would need to allow for different settings for each type of Registry Client

Describe alternatives you've considered

• Manually configuring the NiFi Registry Client within the deployment
• Using NiFi Toolkit/NiPyApi to script the connectivity as part of a post-deployment Job

Additional context

No response

[juldrixx]

It was in my todo list (but time issue 😄) and we even thought to try to implement a new FlowRegistry to use ConfigMaps possibly. But yes, it could be interesting to implement it.

But a choice needs to be made, whether we implement a specifc ressource for each FlowRegistry type or if we create a generic one like NifiFlowRegistryClient and replace the NifiRegistryClient by it.

Personnaly, I prefer the second option.

[ChrisSamo632]

It was in my todo list (but time issue 😄) and we even thought to try to implement a new FlowRegistry to use ConfigMaps possibly. But yes, it could be interesting to implement it.

But a choice needs to be made, whether we implement a specifc ressource for each FlowRegistry type or if we create a generic one like NifiFlowRegistryClient and replace the NifiRegistryClient by it.

Personnaly, I prefer the second option.

A new ConfigMap based Flow Registry sounds interesting - certainly one to bear in mind for future implementations.

I think aiming for the second approach would seem better, if there's a way to achieve that without bloating the resource definition too much