potiuk commented on PR #3:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/airflow-site-archive/pull/3#issuecomment-2846279558
Nice!
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsu
potiuk merged PR #3:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow-site-archive/pull/3
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@airflow.
gopidesupavan commented on PR #3:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/airflow-site-archive/pull/3#issuecomment-2845916259
It will be easy after switch to S3, we just have to nuke the folders from s3
:) so it will not display in documentation page.
--
This is an automated message from the Apac
gopidesupavan commented on PR #3:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/airflow-site-archive/pull/3#issuecomment-2845900566
@kaxil will workout separate for the old version archival, after switching
to S3
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, p
gopidesupavan commented on PR #3:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/airflow-site-archive/pull/3#issuecomment-2845898841
Fixed all the ASF non complaint CSP issues.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL
gopidesupavan opened a new pull request, #3:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow-site-archive/pull/3
(no comment)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsu
potiuk merged PR #2:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow-site-archive/pull/2
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@airflow.
gopidesupavan opened a new pull request, #2:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow-site-archive/pull/2
(no comment)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsu
gopidesupavan merged PR #1:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow-site-archive/pull/1
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@a
> That said, I want to push back on the framing of some feedback as
“negative.” I really appreciate the folks who raised concerns, those
perspectives are vital to making the project stronger and more inclusive.
I think what I wanted to say is that I think we should all exercise
empathy. It's super
That's what I was saying. But welcoming discussion or feedback and then
terming it negative is a no-go, Jarek.
On Thu, 1 May 2025 at 15:07, Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> I propose - let's not be defensive or offensive, but try to hear each other
> and improve things in the future :).
>
> On Thu, May 1
Could you show me the email where I start with that? Check
https://lists.apache.org/thread/ofxnb3k5vjqsdlf8wpp7td4n1fjrmmoq again
On Thu, 1 May 2025 at 15:05, Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Yeah. It more about the communication. "-1" is - literally - by definition
> "negative" when you start your message
I propose - let's not be defensive or offensive, but try to hear each other
and improve things in the future :).
On Thu, May 1, 2025 at 11:35 AM Kaxil Naik wrote:
> >But I would personally love to see more "yes, but" than "no".
>
> Saying "would love to hear what you think" in the original messa
Yeah. It more about the communication. "-1" is - literally - by definition
"negative" when you start your message with "I am strongly -1 on that".
There is no further explanation given that changes that perception.
On Thu, May 1, 2025 at 11:32 AM Kaxil Naik wrote:
> "-1" was backed with rational
>But I would personally love to see more "yes, but" than "no".
Saying "would love to hear what you think" in the original message followed
by terming "negative" is not the way to collaborate.
On Thu, 1 May 2025 at 15:01, Kaxil Naik wrote:
> "-1" was backed with rationale discussion and no one h
"-1" was backed with rationale discussion and no one has said it was a bad
idea but you have said it is "negative".
On Thu, 1 May 2025 at 14:59, Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> > That said, I want to push back on the framing of some feedback as
> “negative.” I really appreciate the folks who raised concer
Thanks for the energy and initiative here.
That said, I want to push back on the framing of some feedback as
“negative.” I really appreciate the folks who raised concerns, those
perspectives are vital to making the project stronger and more inclusive.
Let’s make sure we continue to welcome both e
> Yes, probably too many example dags. Probably this is a consequence of
using them as test dags.
Just comment on that - I think it's more a consequence of not having a way
to separate those. The idea of using test dags for examples and code
snippets is an extremely sound one because it has this
I really like Jens's line of thought. Rather than focusing on the negative
side, try to figure out a way to make it work :). That's very inspiring.
I think the original slack proposal of Jens was rather brittle, but it made
me think that we can actually implement what we need rather quickly.
Foll
19 matches
Mail list logo
