Comment from my side: I think this is a really good idea to discuss **what** we need from the community side to make it "easy" for providers to be contributed and maintained - without over-burdening the maintainers. This is by far the most important aspect of this proposal - and I think it would be fantastic if we hear feedback from Amazon, Google. Astronomer, Teradata and others who recently submitted providers to Airflow - and of course all maintainers that might be worried about impact it will have on our maintenance efforts.
I think before we approve this one and start following it - all parties involved (maintainers, release managers ,contributors, PMC members, stakeholders) will need to agree on understanding: * what is required from them (everyone - stakeholders, contributors. maintainers, PMC members, release managers will have their parts in the process). * what they will have to commit to * what kind of tooling will be needed to make it as efficient as possible without overburdening everyone We are way ahead with tooling and modularisation of airflow than we were a year ago and I think changes and improvements in the tooling and process updates needed to get the process in place are within our reach now. This is the reason why I think it's the **right** time to discuss it. It will take a couple of months to complete all the needed changes, but it all seems doable. Also - I have discussed it with Apache Software Foundation leadership at Community Over Code in Minneapolis - and they are interested and supported in us trying this approach where we want to get Stakeholders more involved and more accountable, while keeping the Apache Way approach, so we should have green light from the Foundation on it. J. On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 12:02 PM Vikram Koka via dev <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Airflowers, > > Every few days, we get a request for adding a new Provider (aka > Integration) into Apache Airflow. We would like to say yes to most if not > all of these, but we have had challenges in being able to absorb many more > providers into Airflow. > > We have had multiple conversations around this in the past, and we would > like to discuss a proposal to enable us to adopt many more integrations to > Airflow. At this stage, this is an early draft intended to get your > feedback. > > I know a lot of us are working on releasing Airflow 3.1.0, so I don't > expect a lot of conversation this week, but wanted to socialize this with > the broader community at the same time. > > Proposal > < > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Provider+lifecycle+update+proposal > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Provider+lifecycle+update+proposal > > Best regards, > Vikram, Jarek, Kaxil, Pavan, and Ash > -- > > Vikram Koka > Chief Strategy Officer > Email: [email protected] > > > <https://www.astronomer.io/> >
