Clarification: Ash is right (I totally forgot about it).

We do have dask in
https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow/stable/extra-packages-ref.html#core-airflow-extras
 and it even explicitly mentions it:

* "dask pip install 'apache-airflow[dask]' DaskExecutor"

So technically speaking you **should** use the dask extra to install
distributed, dask and cloudpickle package - all needed to run the dask
executor. And we will keep it this way - it will just move from "core
extras" to "providers". Actually it will move to "deprecated" and we
will alias "dask" it with the new "daskexecutor", because the name
"apache-airflow-providers-dask" is not allowed by PyPI (I guess the
-dask suffix is considered potentially harmful for typosquatting) so I
reserved "apache-airflow-providers-daskexecutor".

J.



On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 10:34 AM Hussein Awala <huss...@awala.fr> wrote:
>
> > based on the premise that your had to install the `dask` extra in the
> first place to get dask module of the right version
>
> After reviewing the Dask Executor
> <https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow/stable/core-concepts/executor/dask.html>
> section in Airflow documentation, I didn't find any requirement or
> recommendation to add the `dask` extra when using it. So, including the
> dependencies explicitly in the requirements file should suffice to use the
> executor. This means that this change might potentially break existing
> setups for some users when they upgrade Airflow version, which contradicts
> the Airflow deprecation policy.
>
> If the premise holds true for Dask, it should also apply to Celery and
> Kubernetes. Nevertheless, we decided to pre-install their providers after
> the migration.
>
> However, this executor isn't as popular as the others, and as an Airflow
> user, I prefer not to have Dask dependencies in my environment when I
> install Airflow with the Celery executor. This helps avoid conflicts and
> enables me to upgrade libraries independently from their constraints. One
> possible solution could be allowing users to instruct Airflow not to
> pre-install executors providers by passing an argument via
> `--install-option` during pip install, and add install them explicitly by
> providing the extras.
>
> Since the flexibility of our deprecation policy isn't entirely clear to me,
> I'm neutral on this matter, with a vote of +0.
>
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 9:10 AM Elad Kalif <elad...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > 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
> > > >
> > >
> >

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@airflow.apache.org

Reply via email to