Jarek Potiuk
Jarek Potiuk
And just add a bit - it would be quite surprising to see somethig "blocking" provider.yaml changes - we've been adding similar features to `provider.yaml` in pretty much every single...
Ah, i see now. Yes you are right. The fact that we released Airflow 2.8.0 without support for this schema means that providers will have to expose both interfaces. Unitl...
Maybe @uranusjr - raise this point at the devlist as usual?
BTW. We are not blocked "really" from changing provider.yaml. simply we have to expose (and handle) both interfaces.
Just one watchout - It's a bit of tough decision though - we rarely (I can't even remember it) yank airflow version and we need to have good reason for...
Yeah. yanking is a bit extreme measure, I agree.
> We _did_ mark AFS as experimental right? So, in theory we could be a bit more daring in not doing backwards compatibility? Well. Not if we are targetting to...
> Throwing the cat among the pigeons, if we are to have this compatibility layer indefinitely should we then maybe just stick with the initial implementation? I personally am in...
Are you planning to continue that one @uranusjr / @bolkedebruin ?
One more comment here (result of discussion in Slack). I think it would be indeed a very nice feature to add in Airflow, but likely you can achieve it by...