Re: Default Extras for Airflow 2.0

2020-12-05 Thread Jarek Potiuk
Does not matter IMHO :) On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 10:04 AM Felix Uellendall wrote: > Thanks for the link. :) > > Okay, and there is also a differentiation between votes of PMC and votes > of community members for lazy consensus votings? As of my understanding it > doesn’t matter. > > Felix > > Sent

Re: Default Extras for Airflow 2.0

2020-12-05 Thread Felix Uellendall
Thanks for the link. :) Okay, and there is also a differentiation between votes of PMC and votes of community members for lazy consensus votings? As of my understanding it doesn’t matter. Felix Sent from ProtonMail Mobile On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 08:50, Jarek Potiuk wrote: > That was a call f

Re: Default Extras for Airflow 2.0

2020-12-04 Thread Jarek Potiuk
That was a call for lazy consensus :) https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#LazyConsensus Obviously, it was not silent this time :D J. On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 12:12 AM Ash Berlin-Taylor wrote: > "unless someone objects" -- so this isn't an official vote, we only care > if someone objec

Re: Default Extras for Airflow 2.0

2020-12-04 Thread Ash Berlin-Taylor
"unless someone objects" -- so this isn't an official vote, we only care if someone objects :D -a On Fri, 4 Dec, 2020 at 21:41, Felix Uellendall wrote: Makes sense to me. I am actually curious how many people use the imap provider? If anyone does please let me know - just wondering who else

Re: Default Extras for Airflow 2.0

2020-12-04 Thread Felix Uellendall
Makes sense to me. I am actually curious how many people use the imap provider? If anyone does please let me know - just wondering who else has to process email attachments. 😅 +1 (if that’s is supposed to be an official voting - don’t see a voting prefix in the email subject. Isn’t that require

Re: Default Extras for Airflow 2.0

2020-12-04 Thread Tomasz Urbaszek
+1 (binding) On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 2:15 AM Vikram Koka wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 1:41 PM James Timmins wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 1:35 PM Kaxil Naik wrote: >> >>> +1 (binding) >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 5:22 PM Arthur Wiedmer >>>

Re: Default Extras for Airflow 2.0

2020-12-03 Thread Vikram Koka
+1 (non-binding) On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 1:41 PM James Timmins wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 1:35 PM Kaxil Naik wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 5:22 PM Arthur Wiedmer >> wrote: >> >>> +1 (binding) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 6:35

Re: Default Extras for Airflow 2.0

2020-12-03 Thread James Timmins
+1 (non-binding) On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 1:35 PM Kaxil Naik wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 5:22 PM Arthur Wiedmer > wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 6:35 AM Jarek Potiuk >> wrote: >> >>> Following the discussion in >>> https://github.com/apach

Re: Default Extras for Airflow 2.0

2020-12-03 Thread Kaxil Naik
+1 (binding) On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 5:22 PM Arthur Wiedmer wrote: > +1 (binding) > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 6:35 AM Jarek Potiuk > wrote: > >> Following the discussion in >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/12744 >> >> I would like to ask for a lazy consensus to get 4 providers

Re: Default Extras for Airflow 2.0

2020-12-03 Thread Arthur Wiedmer
+1 (binding) On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 6:35 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > Following the discussion in https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/12744 > > I would like to ask for a lazy consensus to get 4 providers installed > always when you install airflow: > > While they are separated out as provid

Default Extras for Airflow 2.0

2020-12-03 Thread Jarek Potiuk
Following the discussion in https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/12744 I would like to ask for a lazy consensus to get 4 providers installed always when you install airflow: While they are separated out as providers (and can be downgraded or upgraded independently, we will make them "required