I agree with Ash -1 as well.
On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 9:29 AM Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org> wrote: > -1 - based on the premise that your had to install the `dask` extra in the > first place to get dask module of the right version, so if we make the > existing extra depends on the new provider then it's good enough. > > On 21 July 2023 06:22:28 BST, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > >Q: Do we want to pre-install Dask provider in Airflow 2.7.0 (with Dask > >executor) once separated ? > > > >Discussion was here: > >https://lists.apache.org/thread/0d9x4kl7hc2qzvho2mbdf35ohn5w12l6 > > > >Please vote: > > > >* +1 -> yes, we want to have dask provider preinstalled > >* -1 -> no, it's fine to make it optional > >* 0 -> no opinion > > > >Consider it my -1: I think we should NOT preinstall Dask provider. > > > >Voting guidelines here. This is really a "procedural" matter rather > >than code modification: > > > >> Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule > unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more favourable votes than > unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have passed -- regardless of > the number of votes in each category. (If the number of votes seems too > small to be representative of a community consensus, the issue is typically > not pursued. > > > >In this case committers have binding votes but other community members > >are encouraged to state their non-binding votes as well. > > > >https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org > >For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@airflow.apache.org > > >
