bugraoz93 commented on issue #45661:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661#issuecomment-2781450179

   > [@bugraoz93](https://github.com/bugraoz93) While developing `dags` 
commands, server commands may share arguments (dag_id, output, verbose, etc.) 
It seems to cause conflicts and complications when PRs are merged. Would it be 
better to write the arguments that are common to commands under `#shared` and 
resolve conflicts in the order in which PRs are merged? ([like 
this](https://github.com/bugraoz93/airflow/blob/4d679845d712c6a291e53e67847bf3e3838f5272/airflow/cli/cli_config.py#L144))
   
   What do you mean by `server commands`? If you mean something like 
`dag-processor`. Those won't be available in `airflowctl`. Most shared ARGs are 
used more on `dags` and `tasks`. We won't transition any `tasks` commands yet 
either at the first iteration. The first plan was in the airflow-core which 
then flatten into commands. This could be a good baseline. What has been 
reverted under remote commands in the combination for further granular split. 
These are now aiming to be in `airflowctl` :) 
   https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/48224
   https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/47538
   
   I believe that for ARGs and or a PR merged in `cli_config.py`, there should 
be a one-time conflict for all downstream PRs when the ARG is added. Even 
though we added the ARGs first, this is inevitable. I am okay with merging the 
ARGs early on, but that won't be enough for conflicts. If we put them in order 
with comments, that could potentially ease the rebase process.


-- 
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