Hi Dilnaz,

Thanks a lot for pushing this forward, and for the updates after the
earlier feedback - AIP 85 looks much clearer than before.

I'm one of the maintainers of DAG Factory (
https://github.com/astronomer/dag-factory), and I like the direction the
AIP is taking. I agree with the pain points Igor raised earlier; it would
be great to support non-Python DAGs natively in Airflow, rather than
converting them as we currently do in DAG Factory.

I've reviewed the AIP page and left some inline comments & questions. Since
the authors are already responding on the AIP page, happy to continue the
detailed discussion there - sharing the summary here mainly for visibility:

1. *Location of schemas and importers*: Where do we see the schemas and
actual importers defined - and how do we plan to govern them?  It would be
important to align, for instance, on how non-primitive operator arguments
should be defined in YAML (e.g., Asset, V1Pod, arbitrary classes) and on
the security aspects of loading arbitrary classes from YAML.

2. *Validation contract*: If users define unknown or unsupported keys and
configurations, should we fail loudly with DagImportErrors referencing
files/lines like the Python DAG import errors? It would be great if we
didn't just skip them.

3.* Decision on which files to parse: *As raised by TP on
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1K6-4cGoZItXGQHZjOydNbc7rGtOp_XKfFurMnFptKe0/edit?disco=AAAB8ofIMRo>
the
Google
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1K6-4cGoZItXGQHZjOydNbc7rGtOp_XKfFurMnFptKe0/edit?disco=AAAB8ofIMRo>
Doc
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1K6-4cGoZItXGQHZjOydNbc7rGtOp_XKfFurMnFptKe0/edit?disco=AAAB8ofIMRo>
, I feel that we should have additional criteria to decide which files to
treat as a DAG - and not rely only on the file extension. As an example,
bundles normally have non-DAG YAML - dbt_project.yml, CI configs, K8s
manifests. Would it make sense to have something similar to the Python
content-level heuristic ("airflow + dag" string check)?

4. *Different importers for the same file extension*: Can/should we support
different importers for the same file extension? It would be great if the
architecture could support overriding the importer per file.

5.* Cross-file dependency tracking:* Declarative DAGs are rarely
single-file. They can share default definitions, for example:
https://astronomer.github.io/dag-factory/1.1.0/configuration/defaults/.
Could importers declare file dependencies in DagImportResult, so the
processor can use them?

6. *Code tab UI*: On get_source_code(), could we have a parameter related
to the file language, which could be used by the Code tab (it is currently
hard-coded with Python)? How are we planning to resolve ZipImporter and
other transformed sources in the UI?

7. *Precedence*: What should be the precedence (per-bundle vs global vs
default importers)?

For the performance questions raised earlier in the thread, we could use
DAG Factory workloads as a baseline, comparing the non-built-in-Airflow
Python layer against a native YAML importer.

Our team is very keen to contribute to the YAML contract definition.

Kind regards,

Tatiana


On Tue, 7 Jul 2026 at 13:48, Dilnaz Amanzholova via dev <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi all, I am following up to request your feedback on AIP-85: DAG importer.
> I attempted to present this at the last Airflow dev call, but the agenda
> was full, and today’s meeting was unfortunately cancelled. As it has been
> some time since this AIP was submitted for review, I would greatly
> appreciate it if you could share your thoughts or any remaining concerns
> here. I understand there are many active discussions, but your input would
> be invaluable in helping move this proposal forward. Thanks, Dilnaz
> Amanzholova
>
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2026 at 2:08 PM Dilnaz Amanzholova <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hey Kaxil,
> >
> > Thanks for the clarification. I have decided to attend, as the next
> > meeting is not for another two weeks. I have added the AIP to the agenda.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Dilnaz Amanzholova
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 17, 2026 at 6:37 PM Kaxil Naik <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Hey not required at all.
> >>
> >> This is just in case you wanted to solicit feedback live on the call
> with
> >> other Airflow devs. Sometimes it is easier that way -- but not
> mandatory.
> >>
> >> More details on the dev calls:
> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Airflow+Dev+Call if
> >> you decide about presenting it next time.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Kaxil
> >>
> >> On Wed, 17 Jun 2026 at 17:32, Dilnaz Amanzholova <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Kaxil,
> >>>
> >>> I was not aware there was a regular call. Is it required to present the
> >>> AIP before voting?
> >>>
> >>> Kind regards,
> >>> Dilnaz Amanzholova
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2026 at 6:26 PM Kaxil Naik <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi @dilnaz -- Are you up for presenting it tomorrow or on the next dev
> >>>> call?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, 16 Jun 2026 at 15:15, Dilnaz Amanzholova via dev <
> >>>> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hi all,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I am following up on AIP-85: DAG importer. All previous concerns have
> >>>>> been
> >>>>> addressed, and the content has been updated on the AIP Confluence
> page.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please review the latest updates at your earliest convenience. I
> would
> >>>>> appreciate your feedback and am available to answer any further
> >>>>> questions
> >>>>> you may have.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>> Dilnaz Amanzholova
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, Jun 5, 2026 at 1:23 PM Dilnaz Amanzholova <
> [email protected]>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> > Hi all,
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > I’m calling vote on AIP-85: DAG importer
> >>>>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/_Q7OEg
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > You can also review the design document here
> >>>>> > <
> >>>>>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1K6-4cGoZItXGQHZjOydNbc7rGtOp_XKfFurMnFptKe0/edit?tab=t.0
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > .
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > Current discussion thread (after scoping down):
> >>>>> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/wtfog0qjrf3oh7355db0x6mqk3o7l2dt
> >>>>> > Original discussion thread (with wider "extendable DAG parsing
> >>>>> controls"
> >>>>> > title):
> >>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/bn0oo47j48xh8r335gd2jrrjz0o7vnjl
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > The vote will run for 5 days, closing on Wednesday, 10th June 2026,
> >>>>> at
> >>>>> > 10:00 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
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > Kind regards,
> >>>>> > Dilnaz Amanzholova
> >>>>> >
> >>>>>
> >>>>
>


-- 
Tatiana Al-Chueyr

Reply via email to