shubham22 commented on code in PR #24680:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/24680#discussion_r910483211


##########
README.md:
##########
@@ -410,6 +410,47 @@ For example this means that by default we upgrade the 
minimum version of Airflow
 to 2.3.0 in the first Provider's release after 11th of October 2022 (11th of 
October 2021 is the date when the
 first `PATCHLEVEL` of 2.2 (2.2.0) has been released.
 
+Providers are often connected with some stakeholders that are vitally 
interested in maintaining backwards
+compatibilities in their integrations (for example cloud providers, or 
specific service providers). But,
+we are also bound with the [Apache Software Foundation release 
policy](https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html)
+which describes who releases, and how to release the ASF software. The 
provider's governance model is something we name
+"mixed governance" - where we follow the release policies, while the burden of 
maintaining and testing
+the cherry-picked versions is on those who commit to perform the cherry-picks 
and make PRs to older
+branches.
+
+The "mixed governance" means that:
+
+* The Airflow Community and release manager decide when to release those 
providers.
+  This is fully managed by the community and the usual release-management 
process following the
+  [Apache Software Foundation release 
policy](https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html)
+* The contributors (who might or might not be direct stakeholders in the 
provider) will carry the burden
+  of cherry-picking and testing the older versions of providers.

Review Comment:
   Thanks for clarifying. 
   1. Aligning this with the current PR process makes complete sense. Can't 
wait to see this process playing out. 
   
   2. The answer to the 1st question that the cherry-picking will go hand in 
hand with the PR process makes it very clear. You're right, we can resolve the 
conflicts as they arise, instead of documenting solution path for every 
scenario. 
   > there will be a lot of people who would "want" this to happen, there will 
be very few who will "make it happen" 
   
   I very much concur on this. 
   



##########
README.md:
##########
@@ -410,6 +410,47 @@ For example this means that by default we upgrade the 
minimum version of Airflow
 to 2.3.0 in the first Provider's release after 11th of October 2022 (11th of 
October 2021 is the date when the
 first `PATCHLEVEL` of 2.2 (2.2.0) has been released.
 
+Providers are often connected with some stakeholders that are vitally 
interested in maintaining backwards
+compatibilities in their integrations (for example cloud providers, or 
specific service providers). But,
+we are also bound with the [Apache Software Foundation release 
policy](https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html)
+which describes who releases, and how to release the ASF software. The 
provider's governance model is something we name
+"mixed governance" - where we follow the release policies, while the burden of 
maintaining and testing
+the cherry-picked versions is on those who commit to perform the cherry-picks 
and make PRs to older

Review Comment:
   > This is mostly dirty, boring and ground work to be done, nothing really 
"cool". I've been doing it for years, so I know what I am talking about :)
   
   Fair enough :) Agree with your current language given the context you 
shared. 



-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to