potiuk commented on PR #36205:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/36205#issuecomment-1866202187

   Well. If we are all ok with breaking change here, I am also fine. The whole 
`provider's` approach is specifically designed to allow breaking changes in 
providers. Users can easliy downgrade to previous provider versions and they 
are generally "future-compatible" because we locked down Hook/Operator API a 
long time  ago. 
   
   Also `common.sql` is designed to support it (but a bit differently as this 
is the 'supporting` provider) - from the very beginning we designed and 
completed `common.sql` to be alwys backwards compatible - because we have many 
providers depend on it, so we can never make `2.*` version of common.sql 
without a major disruption - because it woudl mean that all the providers that 
depend on common.sql will have to be upgraded as well (which will break the 
promise of more-or-less free upgrade and downgrade of providers independently 
of Airflow).
   
   So as long as we get a breaking change in databricks provider, while keeping 
`common.sql` backwards-compatible, I am perfectly fine with having a breaking 
change here.


-- 
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