potiuk commented on PR #25336: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/25336#issuecomment-1199171639
> > @vincbeck @Taragolis - I have not look at very detail of that - the code looks good - but the question is is the "backwards-compatibility" problem mentioned above enough to be a "breaking change" or merely an inconvenience? WDYT? > > As always it is depends on. Personally for me it might be "bug fixes" and "stop catch to broad exceptions" however someone code might not work anymore. In most cases user should get an error, so it not happen implicit... except changing behaviour with `config`. Yep. Agree "breaking change" and "bug fix" has a blurry border :) . For me the best criteria I have to decide is will it make our users fix a problem they did not realise they had when the change is implemented. If we fix an actually wrong user behaviour and assumptions that worked "accidentally" before and were not really intentional - then this is not a breaking change. Which I hear from your description is the case right ? -- 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]
