Yeah I would favour a single "core provider": `apache-airflow-providers-core-modules` or just `apache-airflow-providers-core` sounds more apt.
Example: from airflow.providers.core.sensors.datetime import DateTimeSensor from airflow.providers.core.operators.python import PythonOperator from airflow.providers.core.triggers.temporal import TimeDeltaTrigger On Thu, 15 Aug 2024 at 18:43, Ferruzzi, Dennis <ferru...@amazon.com.invalid> wrote: > Personally, I like "common" but if we decide to look for alternative > names, how about calling them "core providers"? Or does that feel like an > oxymoron since we always make a distinction between 'core" and "provider"? > I also like Amogh's suggestion of "foundation". > > - ferruzzi > > > ________________________________ > From: Amogh Desai <amoghdesai....@gmail.com> > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2024 4:17 AM > To: dev@airflow.apache.org > Subject: RE: [EXT] [DISCUSS] New provider Common.time > > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not > click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know > the content is safe. > > > > AVERTISSEMENT: Ce courrier électronique provient d’un expéditeur externe. > Ne cliquez sur aucun lien et n’ouvrez aucune pièce jointe si vous ne pouvez > pas confirmer l’identité de l’expéditeur et si vous n’êtes pas certain que > le contenu ne présente aucun risque. > > > > +1 for this idea. > > I like the idea of moving the core operators entirely out to the providers. > When it comes to naming, I do not have a strong preference but if we are > looking at some > alternatives to "common", my suggestions would be to try something like: > - "shared": this will make some sense as we plan to share these across more > than one provider(s) > - "foundation": so that it can serve as a "base" or foundation for the > other provider(s). My issue with "base" > is that we do use "base" in some other places, for example, BaseOperator, > could be confusing. > > Thanks & Regards, > Amogh Desai > > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 12:37 PM Wei Lee <weilee...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 for moving core operators to providers. > > > > I also agree with Hussein's statement that common should only include > > things that are used at least twice in other providers. For this specific > > case, would `airflow.providers.time` probably work? > > > > Best, > > Wei > > > > > On Aug 15, 2024, at 3:46 AM, Hussein Awala <huss...@awala.fr> wrote: > > > > > > +1 for moving all the core operators, sensors, and triggers to > > new/existing > > > providers. > > > > > >> New provider Common.time > > > > > > I agree with others who comment on the name. IMHO common providers > should > > > have abstract (or generic) providers/sensors/triggers used by at least > > two > > > other providers, which is not the case here, but it's a good > opportunity > > to > > > discuss the policy to create a new common provider. > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 8:53 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > > > > > >>> It can mean multiple things, but I’d like it if we used it to mean > one > > >> thing in Airflow :) > > >> > > >> It does not have to be common. But Ash, if you have a proposal there > > that > > >> does not conflict with any other meaning used in Airflow already - > > don't be > > >> shy and constructively propose it :) > > >> > > >> On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 7:42 PM Ferruzzi, Dennis > > >> <ferru...@amazon.com.invalid> wrote: > > >> > > >>> I like it. > > >>> > > >>> - ferruzzi > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> ________________________________ > > >>> From: Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org> > > >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2024 7:50 AM > > >>> To: dev@airflow.apache.org > > >>> Subject: RE: [EXT] [DISCUSS] New provider Common.time > > >>> > > >>> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do > not > > >>> click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and > > >> know > > >>> the content is safe. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> AVERTISSEMENT: Ce courrier électronique provient d’un expéditeur > > externe. > > >>> Ne cliquez sur aucun lien et n’ouvrez aucune pièce jointe si vous ne > > >> pouvez > > >>> pas confirmer l’identité de l’expéditeur et si vous n’êtes pas > certain > > >> que > > >>> le contenu ne présente aucun risque. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>> On 14 Aug 2024, at 15:11, Vincent Beck <vincb...@apache.org> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> "common" can refer to "common use cases" or "common usage" which > makes > > >>> sense (at least to me). > > >>> > > >>> It can mean multiple things, but I’d like it if we used it to mean > one > > >>> thing in Airflow :) > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@airflow.apache.org > > > > >
