|
|
|
|
|
|
by toomuchtodo
1032 days ago
|
|
|
I suppose I don’t understand why you couldn’t build an integration with n8n solely with generic webhooks vs having to bring a copy of their software into your stack. You didn’t need a copy of Zapier to integrate with Zapier (although you mentioned it was a clunky integration, I’m sure the Zapier folks would be interested in feedback on how to improve there). It sounds like n8n needs to offer a library under a different license to smooth this integration issue? Correct me if I’m wrong there. Email in profile if you’d rather have the convo there. I’m very interested in smoothing the integration story for all workflow providers, and I misunderstood your use case that you were trying to bring the entire software app in to support your integration. |
|
|
It’s a better user experience for customers. They don’t have to sign up for some third-party service, they don’t have to pay for some third-party service, they don’t have to mess around with API keys or onboarding flows, they don’t have to go to a third-party service to configure how things work, they don’t have to manage their admins separately, etc.
Sure, we could integrate with n8n the same way we integrate with Zapier. But why would we? We already have Zapier for that. And our customers ask for Zapier. And they’ve heard of Zapier. And Zapier has more than 10x number of integrations. There’s no benefit for us to replicate what we already have with Zapier using n8n. The benefit of n8n was closer integration, but in order to get that we would have to spend $50k/yr which simply wasn’t worth it for us.
I don’t think the problem can be solved with a differently licensed library. n8n explicitly considered this use case and this is how they want things to work:
https://n8n.io/embed/