It's fun for me to make Airflow better. I have responded to them and adjusted the document accordingly. Thanks a lot, Kaxil!
On Fri, Aug 2, 2024 at 3:06 AM Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks, Bugra, great turnaround on such a short notice. I have added my > comments too. > > Regards, > Kaxil > > On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 at 17:08, Buğra Öztürk <ozturkbugr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Thanks, Vikram! Answered them in the proposal. > > --- > > Thanks, Jarek! It's a pleasure to be part of and work on this one! :) > > > > Thanks for the points! > > > > - Indeed, secure-by-design should be one of the ground pillars of the > > CLI. I included a small part in the proposal. I will make it more > > detailed > > soon. > > - Agree, releasing this as a separate package would make it easier to > > maintain releases and help reduce dependencies. I liked the name > > apache-airflow-cli. I included it in the proposal so everyone can > start > > thinking about the name if they have any other suggestions. > > - I have the same sense of auto-generating as much as possible. While > > writing the naming convention part, the whole idea was to generate a > > set of > > commands from API via a certain naming convention. Idea indeed should > be > > auto-generated as much as possible without relying on too many changes > > per > > new/updated API endpoint but relying on certain configuration files > > such as > > OpenAPI description (or possible chosen API technology)). > > - Yes, indeed there are some commands like you mentioned. > Additionally, > > some executor-specific commands fall into “Hybrid” commands as well. > > Great > > idea! I agree with making an inventory. The idea behind proposing a > > categorisation between commands was to know what we have and > categorise > > them. The categorization will help us in multiple steps of this AIP. > So, > > indeed one part of the proposal should include an inventory and a > > mapping. > > I will create the inventory. I will map them with the current API > > endpoints > > soon. I will include the inventory and mapping in the AIP when ready. > > > > Kind regards! > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 10:31 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > > > > > Thanks - that looks cool and great you want to take it on :). > > > > > > I think the point you made Vikram is very important and worth > mentioning > > > here on the devlist. One of the "common" part of AIP-72, AIP-78, AIP-82 > > but > > > also the parallel stream of security review of our dependencies, will > be > > > connected to the API technology we are going to use - because Ideally, > we > > > should come up with single, coherent API mechanism used across all our > > > components. > > > > > > I do not want to make a tangential discussion here - so this likely > > > warrants a separate discussion (Kaxil - maybe we can add it for the > next > > > DEV call)? > > > > > > Also I have few other concrete points to add that would be great to > > include > > > in the proposal: > > > > > > - the CLI should be secure-by-design (for example any secrets passed > > to > > > it could be passed via env vars or "reading" from stdin) > > > - I believe the CLI should be a separate package - that should not > > have > > > to have all the same dependencies as "airflow" has - way less number > > of > > > those should be needed to run the "apache-airlfow-cli" package > > (proposed > > > name) > > > - Ideally the API CLI should be as much generated as possible - > > possibly > > > there are tools that can help with that or we can improve / rewrite > > the > > > CLI > > > framework to generate CLI in big parts from (possibly?) OpenAPI > > > description > > > (most likely - it also depends on possible API technology choices of > > > ours). > > > - Currently our CLI is pluggable and has various types of command - > > > commands can be contributed by providers - this should be something > to > > > consider as well - they likely fall into "Hybrid" commands - but I > > > think > > > it would be a great idea to make an inventory of current command and > > > make > > > them part of the proposal to classify the commands. > > > > > > J > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 1:20 AM Vikram Koka > <vik...@astronomer.io.invalid > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks for writing this up! > > > > > > > > I left a quick question as a comment in the proposal. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Vikram > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 2:15 PM Buğra Öztürk < > ozturkbugr...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hey all, > > > > > I have created a proposal for an Airflow 3.0 workstream: to utilize > > API > > > > for > > > > > CLI > > > > > > > > > > Details in https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/4wvOEg > > > > > > > > > > I tried to make it simple and less detailed until we agreed on the > > > > > approach. > > > > > Please provide any feedback. This is my first AIP so any feedback > > will > > > be > > > > > valuable. > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > -- > > > > > Bugra Ozturk > > > > > Data Engineer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Bugra Ozturk > > > -- Bugra Ozturk
