potiuk commented on PR #39055:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/39055#issuecomment-2063673873

   @RobbeSneyders 
   
   > I have to admit that the usage of Connexion by Airflow was a bit of a 
blind spot for us. Connexion was used differently here than we anticipated, 
leading to a much larger migration effort than for most of our users.
   
   Indeed. It's a huge one.
   
   > Aligning the implementation more with our intended interfaces should 
improve the robustness towards the future though. And the redesign of Connexion 
3 makes Connexion itself more future-proof and easier to maintain as well. So 
there is definitely long-term value in this migration.
   
   Yes. I truly hope we can make the decision eventually that we want to go 
this direction - seeing a number of changes and potential disruptions it may 
cause makes - of course - maintainers concerned. After trying it out and seeing 
what it takes, it's not relly a simple "library version" upgrade. So it's not 
likely the PR will make it into the codebase in this form. But I hope we can 
build a consensus and a task force to make it happen - so any comments and 
insights on what else we can do to make it more "standard" is really 
appreciated. I started a discussion - where I hope we can make at least 
decision on moving things in the right direction:  
https://lists.apache.org/thread/yrvp2mg25xcwznt8yr9dmdmxrmomwjs2
   
   > Now that we understand better how Airflow uses Connexion, we will keep it 
in mind when taking future decisions and we hope that you will keep actively 
providing feedback. We would rather collaborate on improvements upstream than 
having you depend on workarounds.
   
   Yes. If you can see something that could be improved and make our lives 
better - it will still take quite some time to make this one into "merged"  
status, so if there is anything Connexion maintainers could do to address the 
use case we have and make it esier and more future-proof to migrate it would be 
great.
   
   > I already addressed a few of your comments, but need some more time to 
look into the remaining ones.
   
   Please. I think a number of our decisions were mostly guesses, and even the 
way we have been integrating in the past were somewhat not the way things were 
intended originally, so any comments and insights from your side would be 
great. 


-- 
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