+1 (binding) Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@gmail.com>于2019年11月15日 周五上午10:02写道：
> 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/> > > > > > >
