Personally I don't mind remote executor. We need to keep in mind that this
is not just naming the executor but the provider and all the other related
objects.
E.g. in #41729 you have these objects
from airflow.providers.remote.models.remote_job import RemoteJob
> from airflow.providers.remote.models.remote_logs import RemoteLogs
> from airflow.providers.remote.models.remote_worker import RemoteWorker
I sorta feel the reverse that distributed is better way to describe in docs
and remote is maybe better for this executor-worker system.
Distributed is a mode of execution that would apply to both remote executor
and celery and k8s executor and ecs. Remote tells you something specific
about the way it is distributed. E.g. it's in a far off corner of your
corporate vpn :)
I also don't feel super persuaded by the notion that remote is too broadly
used and understood by the community. I personally did not know that our
distributed executor systems were described this way in the docs until it
was brought to the attention of the list.
On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 8:29 AM Oliveira, Niko <oniko...@amazon.com.invalid>
wrote:
> As you'd expect Jens I also vote +1 for distributed :)
>
> Remote as it means today is not only in our docs but in our previous
> summit talks, town halls, Github Issues/Discussions, Slack threads, etc.
> It's a term we've used as a community for years. So we should not change
> all that under the feet of our users just because it is difficult to find a
> new name for AIP-69. I think distributed is good for this new feature, but
> I am also curious to see if anyone has other proposals.
>
> ________________________________
> From: Vincent Beck <vincb...@apache.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 7:53:27 AM
> To: dev@airflow.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [EXT] [DISCUSS] Name for the Executor of AIP-69
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> Distributed makes more sense to me. +1 binding on this one. Remote
> executor is too broad to me
>
> On 2024/08/27 14:43:33 Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> > I prefer distributed - as Remote executor is already a well-established
> > term. But this is -0.5 on "remote" - if others think it's ok, I am fine.
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 3:33 PM Scheffler Jens (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T)
> > <jens.scheff...@de.bosch.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Airflow-Devs,
> > >
> > > AIP-69 has come as MVP to the front-door of the repo in form of 3 PRs.
> But
> > > as in the Voting there has been a bit of discussion about how we call
> that
> > > "baby" I'd like to have a wrap-up about the name and see what the
> majority
> > > is for.
> > >
> > > The AIP-69 defined the implementation as "Remote Executor" but the
> exact
> > > term is used in the Airflow docs today for all non-local executors. It
> > > might be short but could lead to confusion.
> > >
> > > I'd like to ask for a 48h collection of opinions about the options:
> > >
> > >
> > > 1. keep it as "Remote Executor" (and adjust the docs to name all
> > > non-local executors to be "distributed")
> > > 2. use "Distributed Executor" as provider and tool name, docs cli
> etc
> > > for AIP-69
> > > 3. Throw in other ideas of names
> > >
> > > This is not a formal vote but please respond with +1/0/-1
> > > binding/non-binding until Aug 29th 2024 4PM CEST.
> > >
> > > My opinion is:
> > > A: +1 binding as it is short and was the original name with the AIP
> posted.
> > > B: 0 binding - can live with this if majority likes it
> > > C: no better ideas that I can bring up. HTTP is too technical. A funny
> > > name could be "AnyWhere" but nobody will understand.
> > >
> > > Jens
> > >
> > > PS: besides the naming looking forward for CODE reviews/approvers in
> PRs
> > > #41729,41730,41731 😀
> > >
> > > Sent from Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
> > >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@airflow.apache.org
>
>
