Response thread there. Can’t remember the full outcome from the top of my head but “Dag, dag, dags” seems fine, preferably for doc, new code, user facing, but not worth the trouble going through the whole codebase for refactoring.
https://lists.apache.org/thread/8k338stlkkp07ko3no70p2nng757kd1w On Sun 31 Aug 2025 at 17:01, Wei Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > I think our previous consensus was “dag" or “dags", but recent PRs, > including mine, have changed them to "Dag". I’m fine with "Dag" or “dag” > (like “dag” a bit more) as long as it’s not “DAG”. > > I believe we should better document the decision this time. I can create > that PR once we finalize it again here. > > Best, > Wei > > > On Aug 31, 2025, at 9:13 PM, Daniel Standish > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Saw this PR https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/55097 > > > > I thought we discussed this at some point that using just "dag" or "dags" > > is perfectly fine. De-emphasizing the mathy origin of the "DAG" concept. > > > > Personally I believe we should leave instances of "dag" or "dags" in the > > docs alone. > > > > Is the consensus I recall just an invention of my mind? > > > > Thanks > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
