Me neither. Also from me +1 (non-binding) on removal. Tao Feng <fengta...@gmail.com> schrieb am Mi., 3. Juli 2019, 18:38:
> I am not aware of this feature either. And +1 on removing it. > > On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 9:36 AM Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I am definitely sure that 99% of users, including me, didn't knew this > > feature ever existed 😀. > > > > It is not a feature worth having tbh. So I am in favor of removing it. > > > > Regards, > > Kaxil > > > > On Wed, Jul 3, 2019, 18:37 James Meickle <jmeic...@quantopian.com > .invalid> > > wrote: > > > > > I didn't even know this was a feature. Seems like it's unnecessarily > > > ambiguous, since you can't tell at a glance whether a variable is a dag > > or > > > a task. Definitely in favor of removal. > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 8:49 AM Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > I'm just suggesting removing the `dag >> task` -- `task >> task` will > > > stay > > > > > > > > > On 3 Jul 2019, at 13:46, Philippe Gagnon <philgagn...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Just to be clear, are you suggesting removing all bitshift operator > > > > > overloads from airflow operators (sorry - the dual meaning of > > operator > > > > here > > > > > is confusing), or just the assignment to DAG behavior? > > > > > > > > > > If it's the former, I find it to be a particularly expressive way > to > > > > define > > > > > dependencies between tasks so I would vote to keep it as is. The > > latter > > > > > usage is much less useful, so I would be +1 on removing it. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 8:42 AM Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> It is possible to assign a task to the dag using the bitshift > > > operators, > > > > >> however it doesn't pick up default_args when done this way < > > > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-883>: > > > > >> > > > > >> ``` > > > > >> dag = DAG('my_dag', default_args=default_args) > > > > >> dummy = DummyOperator(task_id='dummy') > > > > >> > > > > >> dag >> dummy > > > > >> ``` > > > > >> > > > > >> We could fix that, but how about instead we remove this way of > > > assigning > > > > >> tasks to dags, leaving the context manager (`with dag:`) and other > > > > >> constructions (`Operator(..., dag=dag)`) > > > > >> > > > > >> Thoughts? > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
