+1 binding Glad to see this happen.
Great to hear about the progress on Typescript as well, Shivam Rastogi. Since you are using the same interfaces and patterns, it can be folded into the same AIP. Vikram On Sun, May 17, 2026 at 10:08 AM Ash Berlin-Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 binding. Excited to see this get pushed over the line > > -ash > > > On 17 May 2026, at 05:00, Wei Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > Thanks all for the great discussion and for helping shape it better as a > community! > > > > Best, > > Wei > > > >> On May 17, 2026, at 10:39 AM, Aaron Chen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> +1 (non-binding) > >> > >> Really nice feature! > >> > >> Best, > >> Aaron > >> > >> On Sat, May 16, 2026 at 6:38 PM Shivam Rastogi <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> +1 (non-binding) > >>> > >>> I successfully tested the coordinator with my TypeScript SDK. I also > ran a > >>> DAG that mixed Java, TypeScript, and Python tasks in a single pipeline, > >>> exchanging data via XCom across all three runtimes. Every task ran > >>> successfully end-to-end. > >>> > >>> @TP and @Jason Do you think we can include the typescript sdk as part > of > >>> this AIP or will it require a separate AIP? In my opinion, it > >>> doesn't require a new AIP as it will be an extension of the > coordinator. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Shivam Rastogi > >>> > >>> On Sat, 16 May 2026 at 11:36, Stefan Wang <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> +1 (non-binding). > >>>> > >>>> Thanks TP and Jason > >>>> > >>>> — really appreciate the way the discussion feedback got worked into > the > >>>> design, and the coordinator-interface shape that came out the other > side. > >>>> > >>>> Excited to see this land as the foundation for native multi-language > task > >>>> support in Airflow. > >>>> > >>>> Best, > >>>> Stefan > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> On May 16, 2026, at 3:30 AM, Zhe-You(Jason) Liu <[email protected] > > > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi TP, Jens, Jarek, and all, > >>>>> > >>>>> +1 (binding) from me as well. > >>>>> > >>>>> I really appreciate all the thoughtful feedback and comments from > >>>> everyone > >>>>> that helped make AIP-108 and the coordinator interface more > concrete. I > >>>>> look forward to the coordinator interface becoming a strong > foundation > >>>> for > >>>>> native multi-language task support in Airflow and for future language > >>>>> integrations as well. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks everyone! > >>>>> > >>>>> Best, > >>>>> Jason > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sat, May 16, 2026 at 6:27 PM Phani Kumar via dev < > >>>> [email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> +1 (binding). Thanks TP, Jarek, Jens and Jason for the discussion > and > >>>>>> alignment. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Sat, May 16, 2026 at 3:26 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> +1 (binding) -> Thanks for being receptive to all comments TP / > >>> Jason. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> And regarding Jens' point: yes, "naming is difficult". However, at > >>> this > >>>>>>> stage, this name is just a "codename" because it's "Java only," > >>>>>>> "experimental," mostly used internally (except for the package name > >>> in > >>>>>>> configuration), and lacks a separate installable distribution (it's > >>>> just > >>>>>> a > >>>>>>> Python package name). When/If we turn it (hopefully soon) into > >>>>>> full-fledged > >>>>>>> coordinators - with common APIs and a compatibility strategy—it > >>>> **might** > >>>>>>> get real "coordinator" features; this might get handy. It might > also > >>> be > >>>>>>> easier to "promote it" without migrations, which TP was rightfully > >>>>>>> concerned about. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> So, I actually like that it's named "coordinators" now in the > Python > >>>>>>> package name because it allows for easy future evolution without > >>>>>>> unnecessary migration issues. I was far more sceptical about > >>>> implementing > >>>>>>> the new distribution naming schema at this point - because that > would > >>>>>>> "anchor" us much more. I think our discussion resulted in a good > >>> middle > >>>>>>> ground: we avoid overcomplicating things (especially the > development > >>>>>>> process, operational complexity, and intra-compatibility issues), > >>>>>> allowing > >>>>>>> us to get something "working" quickly, while ensuring we aren't > >>> blocked > >>>>>> and > >>>>>>> have a smooth path to implement the longer-term vision later. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I think that was a very good discussion and outcome. Thanks again, > >>> TP. > >>>>>>> Also, thanks to (a bit more silent in this discussion) Jason for > >>> being > >>>> so > >>>>>>> flexible. I really appreciate it. I know firsthand how difficult it > >>> is > >>>>>> when > >>>>>>> a bigger vision you have is kind of trimmed-down, and when you see > >>>> where > >>>>>>> you want to go and others seem to "not see it". It forces you to > >>> twist > >>>>>> and > >>>>>>> turn things to not lose the track of the bigger vision, while > taking > >>>> the > >>>>>>> first baby step toward it. But my experience is that the end result > >>>> might > >>>>>>> eventually benefit from learnings along the way, so trimming the > >>> first > >>>>>>> steps is a good thing (even if it's very difficult mentally). I've > >>> been > >>>>>>> doing it for years in our dev environment. While it generally > follows > >>>> my > >>>>>>> initial vision, it's very different now due to incremental steps > and > >>>>>>> tooling improvements along the way. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> J. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Sat, May 16, 2026 at 10:52 AM Shahar Epstein <[email protected] > > > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> +1 (binding), well done TP and Jason. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Shahar > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Sat, May 16, 2026 at 10:02 AM Tzu-ping Chung via dev < > >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Hi all, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I’m calling vote on AIP-108: Java Task SDK and the Language > >>>>>> Coordinator > >>>>>>>>> Layer > >>>>>>>>> AIP-108 Java Task SDK and the Language Coordinator Layer - > Airflow > >>> - > >>>>>>>>> Apache Software Foundation < > >>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/pY4mGQ> > >>>>>>>>> cwiki.apache.org <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/pY4mGQ> > >>>>>>>>> [image: favicon.ico] < > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/pY4mGQ > >>>> > >>>>>>>>> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/pY4mGQ> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Discussion thread: > >>>>>>>>> lists.apache.org > >>>>>>>>> < > https://lists.apache.org/thread/gjot4bxj9kygj2fk76kx6tyg8s4hr057> > >>>>>>>>> [image: favicon.ico] > >>>>>>>>> < > https://lists.apache.org/thread/gjot4bxj9kygj2fk76kx6tyg8s4hr057> > >>>>>>>>> < > https://lists.apache.org/thread/gjot4bxj9kygj2fk76kx6tyg8s4hr057> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> The vote will run for 5 days until Thursday, 21st May 2026, 07:00 > >>>> UTC. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Everyone is encouraged to vote, but only PMC members and > >>> Committers' > >>>>>>>>> votes are considered binding. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Please vote accordingly > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Approve > >>>>>>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion > >>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Consider this my +1 vote (binding) > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> TP > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
