-1 As much as I would like to see this removed, I feel the same way as Jed above.
In response to the question raised regarding "Experimental features", the reason why this one seems different is because though this was marked as "experimental", it was the only way to interact with Airflow before the full fledged REST API and therefore a lot of users had baked this experimental API into their automation processes. On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 5:37 PM Daniel Imberman <daniel.imber...@gmail.com> wrote: > As everyone above mentioned. I’m all for removing it but we should do so as > part of a major breaking release. Perhaps if we haven’t already we should > at least add deprecation warnings? > > -1 but very down to add deprecation warnings > > On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 4:19 PM Bas Harenslak <b...@astronomer.io.invalid> > wrote: > > > -1 for me too. > > > > Regardless of how we treat the “experimental” status, I often still see > > people using the experimental API for triggering DAGs. IMO it would be > too > > much of a breaking change to remove it in a minor version, so I suggest > > removing it in Airflow 3. > > > > Bas > > > > > Op 16 mrt 2024 om 14:24 heeft Andrey Anshin <andrey.ans...@taragol.is> > > het volgende geschreven: > > > > > > Asked because if it never was an experimental feature, then it can't > be > > > just removed until Airflow 3 which might never happen. > > > In this case the vote should be canceled, and we need to continue to > > > discuss moving it to a separate provider and suspend/remove the newly > > > created provider. > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Sun, 17 Mar 2024 at 00:02, Andrey Anshin <andrey.ans...@taragol.is > > > > >> wrote: > > >> I just wonder if `Experimental` is covered by > > >> > > > https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow/stable/release-process.html#experimental-features > > >> ? > > >> Or is it just another meaning of Experimental ? > > >>> On Sat, 16 Mar 2024 at 23:39, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > > >>> Would you still vote `-1` of course was the question. > > >>>> On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 8:37 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> > > wrote: > > >>>> Question: Jed, Ash: Would you still vote If we move it to provider > > (with > > >>>> status "removed from maintenance except security fixes" - same as we > > did > > >>>> with daskexecutor? > > >>>> J. > > >>>> On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 8:25 PM Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org> > > >>> wrote: > > >>>>> As much as I would love to remove it I'm with Jed: if it worked on > > 2.0 > > >>> it > > >>>>> should work on all 2.x > > >>>>> My vote is -1 > > >>>>> On 16 March 2024 19:08:13 GMT, Jed Cunningham > > >>> <j...@astronomer.io.INVALID> > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>> I forgot to add the "why" - I view this as a breaking change > still. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@airflow.apache.org > > > > >
