If we're looking for alternatives, does the word "agent" work? On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 8:41 AM Daniel Standish < daniel.stand...@astronomer.io> wrote:
> 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 >> >>
