jscheffl commented on PR #41513: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/41513#issuecomment-2297019244
Thanks for the context. This enlightens me. I was never using DAG level kwargs as you had in your example. I also could not find any reference about such usage in the TaskFlow docs (https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow/stable/core-concepts/taskflow.html) nor in the Params docs (https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow/stable/core-concepts/params.html). I am not a deeper level expert - so probably we need to have some guidance from @ashb / @uranusjr / @potiuk - Is the reported flaw a "loop hole" or really a bug? Is it an intended use to have DAG level decorator params defined with any arbitrary name or shall it be in the decorator as `params`? If it is in-line with concepts we might need to add some more examples and also tests to it to ensure it is stable (would not like to accept only the 3 LoC in the PR solely w/o docs and tests). And it would be a new feature or just a stabilization and detailing of a non well documented concept? If it is not intended use do we need to add some validators to prevent such use or at least generate warnings? (Personally I like the syntax as it is in the example but I assume it would need more documentation, tests and examples) -- 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]
