Yes, I agree with Jarek :) +1 essential or essentials -1 under common (non-binding)
Regards, Pavan On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 2:32 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > +1 essential (or essentials) > -1 under common > > (binding) > > Sorry for a bit of modification here, but I think > `apache-airflow-providers-essentials` (with `s` at the end) would be more > appropriate - showing also that it's about various "essentials". But I am > good with either. This is a nuance. > > J > > > On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 3:25 PM rom sharon <r...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Migrate all operators/sensors from core to dedicated provider. > > > > *Discussion thread* > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/2dmlqkcmyomm4q7rrovygs6bw655zx07 > > > > This vote concerns two key decisions. > > > > 1. Provider name selection, options are: > > - essential > > - standard > > - builtin > > - primary > > - core > > - base > > - shared > > > > 2. Placement under common. should the provider be categorized under > common > > <https://github.com/apache/airflow/tree/main/airflow/providers/common>. > > > > For the provider name, please cast your vote using the following format > > > > [ ] +1 <provider name> > > [ ] +0 no opinion > > [ ] -1 <provider name> > > > > For the second decision regarding placement under common, please vote > using > > this format > > > > [ ] +1 under common > > [ ] +0 no opinion under common > > [ ] -1 under common > > > > Everyone is encouraged to vote, although only votes from committers and > PMC > > members are considered binding. > > > > The vote will run for 3 days and last until 2024-08-23 at 12 AM UTC. > > > > Please consider this as my own voting: > > > > *+1 essential* > > *-1 under common* > > *(binding)* > > >
