Dear Dev-Community,
mainly triggered by the deadline for CFP for Summit I dropped two “brand new”
AIP’s as ideas that are running in my head for a longer time. Note these are
DRAFT versions as a first write-up as solution concept and are lagging
technical design and implementation yet.
I’d
+1 (non-binding)
Great to see this happening, hope we will see more proposals towards making
Airflow more flexible!
Regards,
Igor
On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 8:10 PM Daniel Standish
wrote:
> >
> > It doesn’t affect my vote on the API, but I am very strongly against this
> > one part of the AIP:
>
>
> It doesn’t affect my vote on the API, but I am very strongly against this
> one part of the AIP:
> > … dag_id are namespaced with `:` prefix.
> This specific part is getting an implementation/code veto from me. We made
> the mistake of overloading one column to store multiple things in Airflow
+1 (non-binding)
Nice to see it moving along!
From: Ash Berlin-Taylor
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2024 9:00:42 AM
To: dev@airflow.apache.org
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] [COURRIEL EXTERNE] [VOTE] AIP-67 Multi-team deployment
of Airflow components
CAUTION: This email
It doesn’t affect my vote on the API, but I am very strongly against this one
part of the AIP:
> … dag_id are namespaced with `:` prefix.
This specific part is getting an implementation/code veto from me. We made the
mistake of overloading one column to store multiple things in Airflow before,
