I am fine with it :)

On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 5:25 PM Jarek Potiuk <jarek.pot...@polidea.com>
wrote:

> I think we should leave all the fundamentals (or 'core') operators hooks
> etc where they are. I have not even considered moving them. I am ok to have
> 'aieflow.operators', 'airflow.hooks', 'airflow.sensors' for those. It feels
> natural and having them 'higher' in the tree hierarchy is a good way to
> show that they are fundamental part of Airflow.
>
> J
>
> pt., 15 lis 2019, 16:49 użytkownik Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@gmail.com>
> napisał:
>
> > I just have 1 comment:
> >
> > Should we have a "*airflow.core*" (or airflow.providers) for all the
> > hooks/operators listed under *fundamentals *as I feel we are going to
> have
> > "airflow.providers.gcp", "airflow.providers.amazon",
> > "airflow.providers.apache"?
> >
> > What do you all think? Maybe it is not necessary but just wanted to see
> > what you all think?
> >
> > In general, I am happy with this: +1 (binding)
> >
> > Regards,
> > Kaxil
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 12:42 PM Felix Uellendall <felue...@pm.me.invalid
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > > Felix
> > >
> > > Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
> > >
> > > On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 12:46, Kamil Breguła <
> kamil.breg...@polidea.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 (binding)
> > > >
> > > > All my comments were taken into account during the discussion. I am
> > > happy now.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 12:37 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > jarek.pot...@polidea.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Some binding votes here please :) ?
> > > >>
> > > >> J.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 5:25 PM Tomasz Urbaszek <
> > > tomasz.urbas...@polidea.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > +1 (non-binding)
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Bests,
> > > >> > Tomek
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 4:57 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > > jarek.pot...@polidea.com>
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > The email calls for a 2nd attempt to [VOTE] an update to AIP-21
> > > Changes
> > > >> > in
> > > >> > > import paths
> > > >> > > <
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/AIP-21%3A+Changes+in+import+paths
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > with
> > > >> > > the changes described below. The vote will last till Friday 15th
> > > 5pm CEST
> > > >> > > (72 hours).
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Committers have a binding vote but everyone from the community
> is
> > > >> > > encouraged to cast an advisory vote.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > *Summary*:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > The proposal is to update AIP-21 to move all non-core
> > > >> > > operators/hooks/sensor (and related files) to "providers"
> package.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Those packages will be separately released (schedule/process
> TBD)
> > > and
> > > >> > will
> > > >> > > be backportable to 1.10.* airflow series, so that users can
> > install
> > > it
> > > >> > and
> > > >> > > start using new Airflow2.0 operators in their Python 3 Airflow
> > 1.10
> > > >> > > environments (only Python 3.5+ is supported).
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > The proposed split is documented in detail in
> > > https://docs.google.com/
> > > >> > >
> > > spreadsheets/d/17zA5t2JVxnDdg5Cs1Cg_Mb1GXvGctmesfg2L089QSOk/edit#gid=0
> > > >> > > <
> > > >> >
> > >
> >
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17zA5t2JVxnDdg5Cs1Cg_Mb1GXvGctmesfg2L089QSOk/edit#gid=0
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Once we get the proposal accepted, I will update AIP-21 to
> reflect
> > > all
> > > >> > that
> > > >> > > and move the proposed split to CWiki.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Discussion concerning the first vote (and changes discussed and
> > > >> > > implemented) can be found here:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/2c9559184045e772acd21cbdd7435f6bf89c76eb9311311d58d16e5f@%3Cdev.airflow.apache.org%3E
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Consider this my +1 (binding) vote.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > J.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > --
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Jarek Potiuk
> > > >> > > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software
> Engineer
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
> > > >> > > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/>
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > --
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Tomasz Urbaszek
> > > >> > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Junior Software Engineer
> > > >> >
> > > >> > M: +48 505 628 493 <+48505628493>
> > > >> > E: tomasz.urbas...@polidea.com <tomasz.urbasz...@polidea.com>
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Unique Tech
> > > >> > Check out our projects! <https://www.polidea.com/our-work>
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >>
> > > >> Jarek Potiuk
> > > >> Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer
> > > >>
> > > >> M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
> > > >> [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/>
> >
>

Reply via email to