Thanks Constance for driving this.
Looking at the Google Sheet it seems my (binding) vote is missing but no
big problem as I also voted for Option B
On 28.10.25 18:32, Constance Martineau via dev wrote:
Thanks Daniel. Not sure how to make them show up, so made the google sheets
public:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1sNhlNM2YqgTDvWOXp7o0zFF-VquddWANxx7S02G3lXM/edit?gid=0#gid=0
On Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 1:18 PM Daniel Standish via dev <
[email protected]> wrote:
Images did not work
On Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 10:12 AM Constance Martineau via dev <
[email protected]> wrote:
Hi all,
Thank you for your patience while I tallied the votes! For reference
purposes, here
<https://lists.apache.org/thread/7mbztc6dchh73c7cnn7sjm1qtt6gj5zw> is a
link to the vote thread.
As a reminder the options were:
- Option A: Prefer dag in docs; use DAG only when referring to the
class/import
- Option B: Prefer Dag in docs; use DAG only for the class/import
- Option C: Keep DAG as the standard everywhere (status quo)
- Option D: Prefer Dag in docs, use Dag for class/import and alias DAG
(for backcompat reasons)
*Results (Binding Votes Only)*
Based on the results, and following the rules that only binding votes are
counted, with voters able to submit a fractional vote between -1 and +1
per
option, Option B (Dag) won.
We will therefore prefer "Dag" in docs, and use DAG only when referring
to
the class or import itself.
[image: image.png]
*Additional Context*
Because this vote was about convention (not code or architecture), and
because the discussion around voting method itself was interesting, I
ran a
few "what-if" tallies to see how the outcome might vary:
- If all votes (binding + non-binding) were counted, including
multiple
options per person, Option B (Dag) still wins, but by a much closer
margin.
[image: image.png]
- If only the main binding vote (single strongest +1 per voter) were
considered, Option B (Dag) and Option C (DAG) would have been tied.
[image: image.png]
- If the main vote from both binding and non-binding voters were
included, Option C (DAG) would have narrowly won)
[image: image.png]
(For transparency, Ryan Hatter submitted two +1s, so I pinged him to
clarify why should be considered in the single-vote scenario)
*Observation*
It's interesting that the outcome differs slightly between binding and
non-binding voters, with contributors leaning toward Dag and the broader
community favouring DAG.
It's a nice reminder that Airflow serves two audiences: Contributors
leaning toward a cleaner, more readable style, and the wider community
still attached to the familiar "DAG" identity. Both are valid, and it's
interesting to see how the project's voice is shifting as we grow.
*Next Steps*
Since we'd already started shifting documentation toward Dag when it
seemed
to be the general preference, the vote results essentially confirms that
direction.
We'll continue using Dag in docs going forward, keeping DAG only when
referring to the class/import itself. No changes are needed for existing
references unless a doc is being actively updated.
If anybody would like to call a separate vote to create a Dag alias for
DAG, they are more than welcome to. I don't think the results of this
vote
should preclude us from doing that at a later date if the community
agrees.
If anyone has strong objections or follow-ups, please share them by EOD
Friday, otherwise we'll consider this settled.
Constance
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
