potiuk commented on PR #23971:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/23971#issuecomment-1184607503

   > Actually in this PR for now I don't see "breaking changes", it's just 
signature unification, moving commonly used methods (`strip_sql_string` and 
`split_sql_string`) to DbApiHook, and probably returning result unification 
(except Databricks)
   
   Yeah. I think this time we can do without breaking changes, Just wanted to 
brainstorm on "what if". 
   
   > If talking globally I'm a fan of backward compatibility, especially 
between minor versions.
   
   Yeah - for sure - we follow SemVer strictly so if we break compatibility we 
will have to bump the major version. I think I am more into agreeing "yeah 
let's agre whatever we do here should be back-compat by default" and we should 
know the consequences of breaking it, plus I would like to think/brainstorm get 
some ideas on how we can "keep the compatibility". One thing is code review, 
but another is (and we had it in the past) that in a few months from now 
somoene will make a change here, someone else will approve and no-one will 
realise the consequnces of it (that someone might by our future-selves who will 
forgot how important is to keep compatibility here). So I loudly think about 
some ways we can verify back-compatibility automatically at PR level. I don't 
know yet how but I wanted to explore some options while we are reviewing your 
change.
   
   Maybe you can even try to sneak-in backwards-incompatible change and we will 
try to find a way how to detect it automaticaly.
   This is more an exercise than real  need now and here, but I want to treat 
the `common.sql` provider as a kind of playground for that - it's small enough 
to get fully reviewed and back-compat problems detected anyway, but if we can 
figure out some automation here, it will be asier to introduce some  common 
code later (for example split Google Provider into smaller providers later on).
   
   > Also adding a new parameter split_statments=False might be a good idea and 
if @potiuk also supports it I will start working on that
   
   Yep. That's cool.
   
   
   


-- 
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