Yep. Thanks, Ash - indeed that is closely related and if do this, I think
9506 should be fixed together. I added it to the doc.
I also resolved some of the questions and comments in the doc and added a
short "Alternative" - i.e. what is the alternative - monolith Airflow
release as we did so far
Very closely related issue https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/9506
On 5 September 2020 08:01:11 BST, Jarek Potiuk wrote:
>And we have a new addition from Kamil about the need to extend slightly
>plugin mechanism to be able to cover dynamically "Connections",
>"Connection
>Form" and "Extra L
And we have a new addition from Kamil about the need to extend slightly
plugin mechanism to be able to cover dynamically "Connections", "Connection
Form" and "Extra Links" - those are indeed the "core -> Providers"
dependencies that we still have.
They seem to be easy to handle by making provider
Just a short reminder - for some more comments/review on the "PIP package
model of Airflow 2.0" doc
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vV67Qomk_rxVuy1Tj_vrjaNq3Eh-V6n6aLDnOy7gVWk/edit#
I've added one small addition - in this model we want to make sure that
there are no dependencies of core packa
Cool!
If you have comments on particular sections/paragraphs - it's easier to
keep track of it and respond in the doc. If you have some general
statements, and some summary of your thinking after the review - it's best
to respond to the email :)
I am ok with both and will aggregate it eventually.
Jarek,
Thank you, this is very helpful.
I assume that you would like comments in the document itself?
Or, would you like them in email?
Best regards,
Vikram
On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 12:43 AM Jarek Potiuk
wrote:
> As promised during the last call I prepared the proposal on how we can
> approach
As promised during the last call I prepared the proposal on how we can
approach the package model for Airflow 2.0 - including the "Provider
Packages" approach.
https://s.apache.org/airflow-2-0-package-model
I would like to discuss it at our next meeting on Monday. I'd love to
hear your comments.
+1 Kevin on the call :).
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 12:59 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
> Thanks Kevin, Looking forward to see you on the next call.
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020, 08:54 Kevin Yang wrote:
>
> > Thank you Kaxil, this is extremely helpful. We'll try to join at least
> the
> > next meeting trying
Thanks Kevin, Looking forward to see you on the next call.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020, 08:54 Kevin Yang wrote:
> Thank you Kaxil, this is extremely helpful. We'll try to join at least the
> next meeting trying to see if we can provide more perspectives on
> SmartSensor and anything else we can help.
>
Thank you Kaxil, this is extremely helpful. We'll try to join at least the
next meeting trying to see if we can provide more perspectives on
SmartSensor and anything else we can help.
Cheers,
Kevin Y
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 4:28 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have created a document to s
Hi all,
I have created a document to summarize the discussion from our second dev
call for Airflow 2.0.
Thank you all who joined the call.
*Doc Link*:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Meeting+Notes#MeetingNotes-#2:24Aug2020
To all those who attended, can you please double-che
11 matches
Mail list logo
