potiuk commented on code in PR #26759: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/26759#discussion_r985100149
########## docs/apache-airflow/production-deployment.rst: ########## @@ -222,6 +222,29 @@ you can exchange the Google Cloud Platform identity to the Amazon Web Service id which effectively means access to Amazon Web Service platform. For more information, see: :ref:`howto/connection:aws:gcp-federation` + +Applying patches from ``main`` +============================== + +On occasion, a user may want to apply a patch from ``main`` which has not yet made it into a release. Assuming you want to apply a specific PR to one of the official airflow images, you can apply roughly as follows. It's also possible to apply a specific commit. + +.. code-block:: docker Review Comment: Right. I think I got some interesting feedback in the https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-621 and I believe we should have a section on our page that will be clearly marked as "For developers" / "Deveoloper tools" where we make appropriate disclaimers and where we will not only provide such instructions but also add some more information that might direct people who want to start messing with their Airlfow code to our Github repository. Seems like other projects do that (Spark for example). This might go hand-in-hand with the discussion with slack we have about restructuring our documentation: https://apache-airflow.slack.com/archives/CJ1LVREHX/p1661234606247079 and seems to be in-line with the ASF approach, and it would remove the need for test automation. Just having a clear, separate section that you will know it's not for "regular/non-developer" users and have enough disclaimers so that people expect that it MAY work rather than HOULD work. Comments from the LEGAL JIRA of mine: > [Sean R. Owen](https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=srowen) - I like your example about Spark. > We are also about to redo the structure of our documentation (we have an open discussion about it) and I will propose to add a new section "Developer tools", where it will be clearly explained that there are some ways developers engaged in our community developemnt can do stuff and I think adding it in the "airflow.apache.org" documentation is also fine - as long as we have a clear "disclaimer" for this section. Similarly we have https://airflow.apache.org/ecosystem/ ecosystem page where we (According to ASF policies I believe) have links to stuff which comes from ecosystem but is not "Apache" software and we have clear disclaimers about that). > If this is an acceptable approach for others from logal looking at it, then I think that solves our discussion and we can close the ticket, I will bring it to the PMC and we will likely go that route. > Such approach is nice because it might also provide a nice communication tool targeted to our users who would like to become contributors. we can add there some encouragement for those who are both users and Python developers to take a look at our Github Repo, so we can make it another way of "Growing contributors base". -- 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]
