Hi Kevin,

You’re definitely not late and are very welcome to join this initiative!

Having a second set of eyes and experienced contributors during review is
definitely a plus for the project; perhaps I can loop you in when
development starts or when we start brainstorming on the project.

Best,
Jason


On Sun, Mar 1, 2026 at 11:03 AM Kevin Yang <[email protected]> wrote:

> Thanks Jarek for sharing this, and Jason for taking lead on this great
> idea. I wonder if I am late to the conversation, but I am also interested
> in joining this initiative.
>
> In the past few months, I’ve been experimenting with AI coding assistant
> in both Airflow and Ruff projects. Even though the agents are strong in
> coding with clear, explicit, and actionable instruction, there is still a
> gap in terms of how to integrate with dev env to do things such as running
> tests. I think this is skill come to bridge the gap. (In a more automated
> manner)
>
> I am also interested in the idea proposed by Alex, about evaluating the
> agents. This can be helpful to measure the impact of introducing skills,
> and help continually iterate and improve agents.
>
> Thanks,
> Kevin Yang
>
>
> Sent from Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
> ________________________________
> From: Zhe-You(Jason) Liu <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2026 3:51:44 AM
> To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [CALL FOR MENTORS] Google Summer Of Code
>
> Hi Jarek,
>
> Thanks for supporting the idea!
>
> > I would even love to co-mentor it with you if you take the lead. Having a
> co-mentor is always great for coverage when people are unavailable or very
> busy.
>
> Sure! I can take the lead, and you’re definitely welcome to be the
> co-mentor. Any maintainer interested in this project is also very welcome
> to join. I will check how I can register as a GSoC mentor, either on the
> official GSoC site or on the ASF side, and maybe create a dedicated Slack
> channel for GSoC this year.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Best,
> Jason
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 2:27 AM Alex <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi Jason,
> >
> > This is a great project idea. The scenarios you describe (static checks
> > pass, unit tests pass in Breeze, system behavior verified) are exactly
> the
> > kind of testable user stories that would benefit from a shared,
> > reproducible format for evaluation being intentional on what "smart
> enough"
> > means.
> >
> > We're discussing this space in an email thread on a proposed AIP-102 [1]
> > (which might work better as pat of the ecosystem, based on feedback),
> which
> > proposes a benchmark and conformance format for AI capabilities in
> Airflow.
> > A Breeze contribution skill would be a great candidate for an exam: can
> the
> > agent correctly distinguish host vs container context, run the right
> > commands in the right environment, and verify outcomes?
> >
> > Have you already defined pass/fail criteria for those scenarios you
> > mention, or is it more of a manual "looks right" check today?
> >
> > Would love to somehow be involved from the evals and system test side.
> >
> > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/sxnjv27cpm9yr5d0rbqobgvcgmhn7yfd
> >
> > Alex Guglielmone Nemi
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 24, 2026, 16:58 Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Jason,
> > >
> > > I am 100% for that. I've been thinking about this very thing but never
> > had
> > > time to act on it. I totally agree that makes perfect sense. Having
> some
> > of
> > > the GSoC people to work on it would be great because they might come
> with
> > > new perspectives - and even improve or change Breeze if adapting to it
> > > proves too difficult for agents.
> > >
> > > I would even love to co-mentor it with you if you take the lead.
> Having a
> > > co-mentor is always great for coverage when people are unavailable or
> > very
> > > busy.
> > >
> > > J.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 10:02 AM Zhe-You Liu <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Jarek,
> > > >
> > > > I have a small project idea similar to the recent
> “airflow-translation”
> > > > agent skill: an “airflow-breeze-contribution” /
> > > > “airflow-contribution-verification” agent skill (maybe a better name
> > > would
> > > > also mention “prek”).
> > > >
> > > > Breeze is definitely one of the most powerful CI and developer tools
> we
> > > > have. However, in my experience, these agents (Claude Code, Gemini
> CLI,
> > > > GitHub Copilot–like IDE or CLI tooling) aren’t smart enough to use
> > Breeze
> > > > as an environment that matches the correct, reproducible GitHub CI
> > > > environment. Even though we have added `AGENTS.md` and mention the
> > > > contribution docs in it, it doesn’t really seem to work. It mostly
> > serves
> > > > as extra context and just increases the context window IMHO.
> > > >
> > > > The expected results of the project would be:
> > > >
> > > > 1. The AI tools should be smart enough to leverage Breeze.
> > > > 2. The AI tools should **respect the Breeze environment** and **be
> able
> > > to
> > > > distinguish whether the current session is inside Breeze or not**, so
> > > they
> > > > can decide whether to run host commands (e.g. ‎`breeze
> start-airflow`),
> > > > commands inside the container (e.g. ‎`pytest` or ‎`airflow ...`), or
> > even
> > > > jump out of Breeze container to run some host commands then jump back
> > > into
> > > > the Breeze container.
> > > > 3. Ensure consistency between the new skills and the Breeze CLI via
> > > > automated static checks (maybe using the “prek” mechanism to
> > > automatically
> > > > sync Breeze CLI docstrings to the correct paths for the agent
> skills),
> > so
> > > > that the Breeze CLI remains the single source of truth.
> > > >
> > > > Here’s the typical workflow of my development journey after making
> all
> > > the
> > > > changes in a PR, which might be helpful when drafting the agent
> skills:
> > > >
> > > > Scenario 1) Make sure all the static checks pass
> > > >
> > > > 1. Stage all the changes with ‎`git`.
> > > > 2. Run ‎`prek`, then fix all the static check errors.
> > > >
> > > > Scenario 2) Make sure all the relevant unit tests in the current PR
> > pass
> > > >
> > > > 1. Run ‎`breeze shell` to start the Breeze container as a clean
> testing
> > > > environment.
> > > > 2. Run ‎`pytest` with a partial path to the modules/classes instead
> of
> > > > running the full test suite in the same terminal session.
> > > >
> > > > Scenario 3) Verify the system behavior
> > > >
> > > > 1. Add a new Dag related to the new feature or bug.
> > > > 2. Run ‎`breeze start-airflow` (possibly with third-party system
> > > > integration via the ‎`--integration` flag).
> > > > 3. Trigger the DagRun in the UI (although for the agent mode we
> should
> > > use
> > > > a CLI trigger instead, for simplicity purposes).
> > > > 4. Verify whether there are any errors across the components.
> > > >
> > > > I’m not sure whether adding this agent skill and making our AI tools
> > > > respect the Breeze environment would be a suitable project for GSoC
> or
> > > > not.I would appreciate any suggestions on this project idea and
> whether
> > > the
> > > > overall direction makes sense to everyone.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Jason
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 4:22 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hello dear Airflow community,
> > > > >
> > > > > Apache Software Foundattion has been officially accepted as a
> Google
> > > > > Summer of Code organisation and if you would have an idea for a
> > > > > project, that could be done by participants of the GSOC -  there is
> > > > > still time to volunteer and add some project that you would like to
> > > > > run.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mentoring in GSOC is really something that is best suited for
> > > > > committers who have some small-ish projects in mind, with clear
> ideas
> > > > > of what needs to be done. These projects should not require
> extensive
> > > > > Airflow knowledge from those participants, and failure to complete
> > > > > them should not be critical, although completion would be
> beneficial.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mentoring usually requires some time, but not much - and I
> personally
> > > > > would say - this is a very rewarding experience. I've personally
> > > > > gained many friendships from mentorships I've done, people grew
> when
> > I
> > > > > was mentoring them and I have tear-shedding stories about some of
> the
> > > > > mentorships I run. This includes a talk at Community Over Code
> where
> > > > > my mentee from Peru (and a few other PMC members' mentees)
> described
> > > > > her story: she went from being low and depressed while supporting
> her
> > > > > mother to becoming an experienced developer advocate with good job
> > and
> > > > > great stability—on a UK talent visa. At the end of the talk she
> > > > > thanked her mother for supporting her—she brought her mother to the
> > > > > conference and her mother witnessed the talk in person.
> > > > >
> > > > > Those are things you can't buy with money, or learn, you need to
> > > > > experience them and let them happen. And for that you need to give
> it
> > > > > a chance.
> > > > >
> > > > > So if you would like to participate, submit your project here and
> > read
> > > > > more about GSOC:
> > > > >
> > > > > https://community.apache.org/gsoc/guide-to-being-a-mentor.html
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, for those who would like to be mentors, I offer something
> > > > > myself. Since I've been a mentor quite a few times, I am super
> happy
> > > > > to help new mentors. I volunteer to "mentor the mentors" and am
> happy
> > > > > to privately discuss and meet with those who want to take on
> > > > > mentorship and help them become great mentors.
> > > > >
> > > > > Also maybe other past mentors would join me in that. We had quite a
> > > > > few mentors in various past programs, and I am sure their
> experience
> > > > > is similar to mine.
> > > > >
> > > > > J.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to