Sounds like a good time to set the process up. +1 from me as well.

--
Regards,
Aritra Basu

On Fri, Oct 27, 2023, 6:42 PM Vincent Beck <vincb...@apache.org> wrote:

> I like that. I also think it is important to have a process to remove
> provider if needed. +1
>
> On 2023/10/27 09:00:25 Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> > > I think in the case of Qubole it is pretty easy to remove it from the
> > provider codebase. I'm pretty sure that almost no one even noticed this
> > removal.
> >
> > Yeah. Agree. This one is pretty "obvious" that's why I would like to
> create
> > a process for doing it along the way so that in the future if we have
> other
> > non-obvious cases we can just "follow the process".
> >
> > BTW.That would be really great to have as with it, we will have a
> complete
> > "life-cycle" of the providers.
> >
> > * we know how we approve the new ones
> > * we know how we release new versions (Elad is amazing to release them
> > every few weeks)
> > * we know how we maintain back-compatibility (bumping min-version of
> > Airflow that we regularly do )
> > * we know how to involve stakeholders to system-test them and to make
> them
> > work in a stable way when they connect to external services (Amazon
> works,
> > Google in Progres, Open API and others promised by Astronomer)
> > * we know how to involve stakeholders with mixed-governance in case they
> > want older releases (never happened yet but we know how to do it)
> > * we know how to suspend and resume them when they prove to be
> problematic
> > and pass resolution of that to external stakeholders (happened with
> Yandex
> > - both suspend and resume)
> > * we (will finally) know how to retire them when we decide we do not want
> > to maintain them - except security fixes - any more
> >
> > That will pretty much complete our process of "life-cycle" management for
> > providers.
> >
> > J.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 10:00 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >> I suggest also removing it from pypi for security reasons. If there
> is a
> > >> security issue with it then the issue will remain with us.
> > >>
> > >>
> > > I am quite sure we still have to handle security issues if someone
> finds
> > > them. releasing such a provider will still be possible using the
> tag/branch
> > > and we will be obliged to release a new version IF it is still used
> and a
> > > security issue is found.
> > > Removal of packages from PyPI does not remove our obligation to fix a
> > > security problem. We have  also source packages released via
> > > downloads.apache.org and archives.apache.org - and those we can't
> remove
> > > either.
> > >
> > > I think this is one of the obligations of the Foundation being the
> > > "steward" of software it releases  - that's why there is also the
> attic PMC
> > > to manage projects that PMC is unable to support (projects are moved to
> > > attic when they fail a roll call from the board with less than 2 PMC
> > > members confirming that they are still there and ready to handle
> releases
> > > if needed. It's also being discussed to be more formal for the CRA
> > > regulations right now - "stewards" of the software put on the market
> should
> > > be responsible for handling security issues in a timely manner). The
> act of
> > > release with 3 +1s of PMC is a legal act of the Foundation placing
> software
> > > on the market and we can't make it "unhappen".
> > >
> > >
> > >> B.
> > >>
> > >> Sent from my iPhone
> > >>
> > >> > On 26 Oct 2023, at 20:20, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Hello Airflow community,
> > >> >
> > >> > How do we feel about removing the Qubole provider completely
> (leaving
> > >> only
> > >> > old releases in PyPI?
> > >> >
> > >> > On September 1 2023 (
> > >> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/p394d7w7gc7lz61g7qdthl96bc9kprxh)
> the
> > >> > Qubole operator ws suspended.
> > >> >
> > >> > Due to the reasons described in the thread (Qubole got acquired and
> the
> > >> > service is generally abandoned) there is pretty much no chance for
> it
> > >> to be
> > >> > resumed.
> > >> >
> > >> > I'd love to remove it completely and introduce a process where we
> can do
> > >> > similar things in the future for other providers if we decide to do
> so.
> > >> >
> > >> > I checked in the Attic project in the ASF (this is where abandoned
> > >> project
> > >> > of the ASF get moved to) and it seems that just removing part of the
> > >> > project that has an active PMC is not going through attic
> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ATTIC-218 . We are free to
> > >> define our
> > >> > rules for that and I would like to use the opportunity to hash it
> out
> > >> and
> > >> > propose a process (similarly to suspension) and criteria to remove
> > >> > providers from being maintained by us.
> > >> >
> > >> > It's more than suspension. We will completely stop updating the
> related
> > >> > code (right now some automated changes can still be applied and
> > >> suspended
> > >> > providers can be resumed with simple PR). I would like to have the
> > >> "next"
> > >> > step after "suspending" - removal.
> > >> >
> > >> > Roughly - we  send PROPOSAL followed by VOTE (or immediately VOTE in
> > >> > obvious cases) with justification, PMC members only have the binding
> > >> votes
> > >> > (similar as for releases).
> > >> >
> > >> > Only git history will remain - all the rest will be removed
> (including
> > >> > extra) - no traces of the provider remain in the next MINOR release
> > >> (2.8.0
> > >> > in the case of Quibole). The provider will still be in PyPI and
> > >> historical
> > >> > releases will be in https://archive.apache.org . If someone would
> like
> > >> to
> > >> > bring back such a provider, It should go through the same process
> as a
> > >> new
> > >> > provider (voting/consensus). And we might reject it.
> > >> >
> > >> > WDYT? Any comments for such an approach / process  ?
> > >> >
> > >> > J.
> > >>
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@airflow.apache.org
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@airflow.apache.org
>
>

Reply via email to