React is currently licensed under MIT. https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/LICENSE
https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/facebook-just-changed-the-license-on-react-heres-a-2-minute-explanation-why-5878478913b2/ On 11/27/19, 9:11 AM, "Kamil Breguła" <kamil.breg...@polidea.com> wrote: [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Is React legal in Apache initiatives already? I heard that this project changed the licenses, but we should watch out for Facebook. https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.itprotoday.com_devops-2Dand-2Dsoftware-2Ddevelopment_apache-2Dfoundation-2Dand-2Dfacebook-2Dstandoff-2Dover-2Dreactjs-2Dlicense&d=DwIBaQ&c=qrd1rYdJNb4QhfvJv5PebOPglYwfSMJ71NR_1HMKptQ&r=TfriZmlluvBPSiGDG1II85Whszw5E4TwSIipOGURQGQ&m=cju2yQdN9LfNqJQrqVsTEEMrpzYuH05GsuxPIyrUeZs&s=NzcCT-xhpLMIOFlb3EpK4_b1ypfB_scwQ4PfDJKLSis&e= Here is license for Angular: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__angular.io_license&d=DwIBaQ&c=qrd1rYdJNb4QhfvJv5PebOPglYwfSMJ71NR_1HMKptQ&r=TfriZmlluvBPSiGDG1II85Whszw5E4TwSIipOGURQGQ&m=cju2yQdN9LfNqJQrqVsTEEMrpzYuH05GsuxPIyrUeZs&s=FsWIhNpjxj24-nUznPIL4f5CkAoGm5fEG9CmQg443tg&e= On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 3:53 PM Dan Davydov <ddavy...@twitter.com.invalid> wrote: > > +1 to everything you said, it all sounds like awesome work : ). Hopefully > will be easier to make the front-end code testable as well. Another thing > to maybe think about in the future is plugin/customization of the UI. E.g. > being able to have custom UI widgets for operators that e.g. visualize data > in some way (it's super useful for ML at least). Also not a front-end guy > either, but React seems like a fine choice. > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 12:07 PM Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Hi everyone, > > > > We here at Astronomer are thinking about what we'd next like to work on to > > improve Airflow, and one of the most visible ways we could improve Airflow > > would be to update the UI, and make it, well, more designed and less > > grown-over-time :) > > > > A non-exhaustive list of things we'd like to fix/improve/add in the UI > > > > - Making the UI more consistent. For example the actions you can take via > > the Browse pages are different to the ones you can take via the Task > > Instance modal, and none of those are visible when you're on any of the TI > > pages. > > - Update the look and feel to be more modern. It's especially noticeable > > now that we've redesigned the project website. > > - Improve the UX and "usefulness" of the UI. There's lots of power in > > there, but some odd quirks in to how information is presented that could be > > improved. > > - Have "real time" updating of the UI. (This is a biiig chunk of work, > > especially the backend component for this and is a whole separate > > discussion, but we want to work on this.) > > > > We build the UIs for Astronomer in React so we were thinking about using > > React again here on Airflow. There are a couple of ways we could do this: > > > > - We could update/redesign/rebuild the existing mostly static pages in > > place (i.e. just change the templates/js/css) > > - A hybrid approach where we could add react to chunks of the page, but > > keep parts of it server-rendered. > > - A total re-write where the UI is react-only and the UI just speaks to an > > API server. > > > > The main thing I'm conscious of is avoiding the "dual webserver" we had > > with the RBAC addition which caused all sorts of pain, both for > > development and for users. I want to avoid that pain again. > > > > The other thing is that React has a higher learning curve, so if we do > > decide on React we should make sure that we have some clear guidelines on > > how to structure and test the code, and better yet machine-enforce rules. > > > > Do people have opinions on React in general (I asked in #sig-ui on slack > > and the few people there were broadly positive of React) and the approach > > we should take specifically. Normally I'm a bit of a luddite when it comes > > to HTML+JS and I like things to be progressively enhanced buuut maybe that > > isn't a requirement here.. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > -ash
