[GitHub] [airflow] dstandish commented on pull request #32053: Change `as_setup` and `as_teardown` to instance methods

2023-06-23 Thread via GitHub
dstandish commented on PR #32053: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/32053#issuecomment-1605068228 OK @uranusjr @ephraimbuddy @jedcunningham the scope of this PR expanded a little bit. I wanted to add validation so that (1) a task can't be both setup and teardown, (2) once you

[GitHub] [airflow] dstandish commented on pull request #32053: Change `as_setup` and `as_teardown` to instance methods

2023-06-22 Thread via GitHub
dstandish commented on PR #32053: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/32053#issuecomment-1602898460 > Here is why: > > ``` > # makes sense, s1/t1 wrap w1 > s1.as_setup() >> w1 >> t1.as_teardown(s1) > > # later in the file... > s1 >> w2 >> t1 > ``` > >

[GitHub] [airflow] dstandish commented on pull request #32053: Change `as_setup` and `as_teardown` to instance methods

2023-06-21 Thread via GitHub
dstandish commented on PR #32053: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/32053#issuecomment-1601472729 > > > This looks good but what do you think about not having `as_teardown(setuptask)`? > > > > > > What don't you like about it? > > Would you prefer kwargs only? > >

[GitHub] [airflow] dstandish commented on pull request #32053: Change `as_setup` and `as_teardown` to instance methods

2023-06-21 Thread via GitHub
dstandish commented on PR #32053: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/32053#issuecomment-1601363730 > This looks good but what do you think about not having `as_teardown(setuptask)`? What don't you like about it? -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.