+1 binding, great work TP and Jason.

Regards,
Rahul Vats



On Sun, 17 May 2026 at 17:49, Vikram Koka via dev <[email protected]>
wrote:

> +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]
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to