benthos

Yes, they are similar. ArkFlow is mainly based on DataFusion. Bento actually comes from Benthos. Currently, the ArkFlow project is in the early stages and no performance comparison test has been conducted, but I believe that ArkFlow will outperform them in the long run. Benthos: https://github.com/redpanda-data/benthos DataFusion: https://github.com/apache/datafusion

As a freelance engineer who's a long time Benthos contributor and who volunteered a lot of community support for this project in the past several years, I don't think it makes sense to fork it and I'm perfectly happy with the current approach where the core engine (https://github.com/redpanda-data/benthos) is MIT licensed as @jeffail mentioned and 3rd party plugins can live in other people's repos and have various licenses, one example being https://github.com/redpanda-data/connect. I'm 100% committed to keep contributing to Benthos as long as it remains free and open source and I'm also happy to continue offering community support to whomever requests it on the official channels on Discord, Slack, GitHub etc.

Hey it's Ash (the maintainer being talked about in the blog). I'm not one for fork drama and I haven't had a chance to fully read the blog so I don't have a lot to say. However, this is a full fork of the entire codebase, which means plugin authors will need to choose one project or the other and are locked in, and is entirely unnecessary on both a technical and legal perspective. If they'd instead chose to fork the plugins themselves (the only parts where the licenses changed, all except two are Apache V2) then all users can pick and choose which ones they include in their projects, and it doesn't fragment the ecosystem at all. Your plugins would compile in my project, and mine would compile in yours. The part they're choosing to fork here, which will cause this rift in the community, is still MIT licensed: https://github.com/redpanda-da