Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.



Warning
REPLACED BY Airflow 3 Workstreams



Info
titleNote

This page is a collection of opinions of different stakeholders as planning for Airflow 3.0 Release. It is forked-off the discussion in Devlist: [HUGE DISCUSSION] Airflow3 and tactical (Airflow 2) vs strategic (Airflow 3) approach. It is just a set of points, no concrete planning yet and not agreed. Please rather see this page as a playground to collect items to discuss and notes to share.

As this page is intended to collect thoughts and ideas, please feel free to adjust content and leave your name as vote/stakeholder. It is intended that we can use this space to collaborate between Airflow maintainer group and interested stakeholders.

If one argument fits into multiple sections please add it just to one. We might move the content and re-align over time, redundancy is not helpful first place.

...

Info
titleNote

We know that no software is perfect. We always have more wishes. Consider we are moving to Airflow 3.0, which things from the 2.x is a "must have" to keep. Not that we forget about these.


Item / Description
Describe the Airflow 2.x approach or feature we must not break.
Rationale
Describe the reason
Stakeholder backing
Please add your name if you agree - so we see how many people share this requirement
Open Questions to discuss
Please post questions that need to be discussed for understanding of the raised point or clarifications (preventing too many comments, please directly here as text)

Continuing to have the option of using the many thousands of operators with 90+ providers

If we would lose all providers with 3.0 all the ecosystem would need to start from scratch. This would make Airflow un-usable.
  • Q by Unknown User (jscheffl): We can assume that small adjustments must be made such that providers are made compatible with 3.0? Or would you assume it is not allowed to have breaking changes on this side?

Allowing to scale and complexity of DAGs we have with Airflow 2.x today

Because setups existing  today must be further supported with Airflow 3.0 as well


Things we need to consider as "Promise" for Migration

Info
titleNote

Most of the contributors are with Airflow since 1.x. If not then most of us at least as a user have gone through the migration from 1.x to 2.x. In this chapter/are please list the things that need to be assured for a 3.x planning that we need to consider. We know we need to make a user transition "easy" to migrate over from 2.x to 3.0 - assuming with a 3.0 version we do not want to lose a large user base.


Item / Description
Describe the Airflow 2.x approach or feature we must not break.
Rationale
Describe the reason
Stakeholder backing
Please add your name if you agree - so we see how many people share this requirement
Open Questions to discuss
Please post questions that need to be discussed for understanding of the raised point or clarifications (preventing too many comments, please directly here as text)
With a 3.0 version we move a lot of existing installs out of the comfort zone. Users might be scared to migrate and will be long time on a 2.x release until all stability and function is possible in a 3.x branch. We also might lose users and the effort of migration will have many considering to migrate to other products / solutionsIn support channels (Slack/Github) we see a lot of requests still coming for Airflow 1.x and 2.3-2.5 - seems a lot of people are not regularly upgrading. If we release a 3.0 with a lot of breaking changes we might lose a lot of users and installs.

Ideas for Target Airflow 3.0 Design

Info
titleNote

In this section please sketch ideas and Designs we should consider. This is the most "playground-like" areas. Rather drop more than less, see it as "brainstorming" field.


Item / Description
Describe the Airflow 2.x approach or feature we must not break.
Stakeholder backing
Please add your name if you agree - so we see how many people share this requirement
Open Questions to discuss
Please post questions that need to be discussed for understanding of the raised point or clarifications (preventing too many comments, please directly here as text)