OscarLigthart opened a new pull request, #60549: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/60549
<!-- Thank you for contributing! Please provide above a brief description of the changes made in this pull request. Write a good git commit message following this guide: http://chris.beams.io/posts/git-commit/ Please make sure that your code changes are covered with tests. And in case of new features or big changes remember to adjust the documentation. Feel free to ping (in general) for the review if you do not see reaction for a few days (72 Hours is the minimum reaction time you can expect from volunteers) - we sometimes miss notifications. In case of an existing issue, reference it using one of the following: * closes: #ISSUE * related: #ISSUE --> ## Context This PR adds the ability for a user to filter the stream of tasks given a certain depth. It builds further upon the recent implementation of allowing to retrieve a partial dag from a root with a given depth in core and the API. * related: #58450 ## Example An example of what the menu will look like is given here: <img width="1713" height="1050" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/3396b3d4-e72c-49cf-b07a-7bc4f563f525"; /> ## UX Changes What's changed is that we now allow for the setting of a depth parameter. In which the user will only see an X amount of tasks away from the `root`. The idea of having this depth was to allow the user to traverse the graph a bit easier, which is useful when the DAGs get complex, to understand how tasks are related to one another. However, with a static filter, the depth parameter will require a lot of clicks from the user. At the same time, we don't want to get rid of the static filter, because it's useful to check some task information without necessarily altering the current view of the graph/grid. In order to get the best in each scenario, I introduce a mode for Task Stream filtering. A user can then specify themself whether they want to "traverse" the DAG, or investigate the "static" view. Happy to discuss whether this makes sense, or how it can be improved! ## Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR? <!-- If generative AI tooling has been used in the process of authoring this PR, please change below checkbox to `[X]` followed by the name of the tool, uncomment the "Generated-by". --> - [x] Yes (please specify the tool below) Claude Sonnet 4.5 <!-- Generated-by: [Tool Name] following [the guidelines](https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/contributing-docs/05_pull_requests.rst#gen-ai-assisted-contributions) --> --- * Read the **[Pull Request Guidelines](https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/contributing-docs/05_pull_requests.rst#pull-request-guidelines)** for more information. Note: commit author/co-author name and email in commits become permanently public when merged. * For fundamental code changes, an Airflow Improvement Proposal ([AIP](https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Airflow+Improvement+Proposals)) is needed. * When adding dependency, check compliance with the [ASF 3rd Party License Policy](https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x). * For significant user-facing changes create newsfragment: `{pr_number}.significant.rst` or `{issue_number}.significant.rst`, in [airflow-core/newsfragments](https://github.com/apache/airflow/tree/main/airflow-core/newsfragments). -- 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]
