dstandish commented on code in PR #30271:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/30271#discussion_r1232796844
##########
airflow/models/abstractoperator.py:
##########
@@ -188,6 +188,33 @@ def get_flat_relatives(self, upstream: bool = False) ->
Collection[Operator]:
return set()
return [dag.task_dict[task_id] for task_id in
self.get_flat_relative_ids(upstream=upstream)]
+ def get_upstreams_follow_setups(self) -> Iterable[Operator]:
+ """All upstreams and, for each upstream setup, its respective
teardowns."""
Review Comment:
Yeah.... the problem with `:meta private:` is it has no effect on IDE
behavior. So while it's technically private, users would have a tough time
seeing that.
So. leading underscore is much better, from that perspective.
However, if we use leading underscore, then, wherever we use it, it looks
like a bad usage. Because we're trying to indicate private w.r.t. user, not
private w.r.t. the class (which is what underscore means).
and the IDE can't distinguish between user and internal. Wish there was a
better solution. But for now seems meta private is best we can do.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
