Reply inline On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 11:32 AM Felix Uellendall <felue...@pm.me.invalid> wrote: > > Kamil, I am not sure what the next steps towards the docs are but should we > already update the Pull Request Template and add a reference to the updated > section? I think this would make it easier to find the related docs. I am not > sure how much we want to describe in that template. > I wanted to add an automatic check if a new file appeared, it was added to integration.rst. In this case, the check will take place on CI and you will not need to add additional information for users.
If you have suggestions for improvement, you can submit them via PR: https://github.com/apache/airflow/edit/master/.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md > Speaking of this I am feeling that the template also could need some > improvements. In some projects I have seen some kind of GitHub App / bot e.g > in Flink which checks the PR description. Maybe this can be useful to us, too? > I always support any automation that may be helpful to us. > Felix > > Sent from ProtonMail Mobile > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 09:48, Kamil Breguła <kamil.breg...@polidea.com> wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > I would like to inform you that we have order in the integration.rst file. > > https://airflow.readthedocs.io/en/latest/integration.html > > > > As part of the work, a list of hooks and operators was extracted to a > > separate file and missing integration have been added. > > https://airflow.readthedocs.io/en/latest/operators-and-hooks-ref.html > > > > I would ask all contributors to add new operators and hooks if > > appropriate. This file can reduce the number of questions like - "is > > there operator A in Airflow" or others. > > > > As part of the work, there was also a question of backwards > > compatibility of documentation links. > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/6213#pullrequestreview-294842382 > > If anyone is interested, I invite you to discuss. > > > > Thanks
