antonio-mello-ai commented on PR #63475:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/63475#issuecomment-4060026367

   Thanks for the review, @Lee-W.
   
   You're right that worker-to-triggerer is normally fast, and short 
`execution_timeout` values are uncommon. But the core issue here isn't about 
speed — it's a **semantic conflict**:
   
   `execution_timeout` on `BaseOperator` wraps the entire `execute()` method 
and kills the task on expiry. HITLOperator reuses that same parameter to 
compute the trigger's response deadline. These are two fundamentally different 
concerns:
   
   1. **Task execution guard** (how long `execute()` can run before being 
killed)
   2. **Human response window** (how long the trigger waits for input after 
deferral)
   
   When notifiers are involved (e.g., `SmtpNotifier`), the time before 
`defer()` is not negligible. With `execution_timeout=timedelta(seconds=30)` and 
a slow SMTP server, the task can be killed by BaseOperator's timeout *before* 
it even defers — which defeats the entire purpose of HITL.
   
   Even without notifiers, the current design means users can't independently 
control "how long my task is allowed to run" vs "how long to wait for human 
input." These are separate knobs that shouldn't be coupled.
   
   The fix is backward-compatible (auto-migrates `execution_timeout` → 
`response_timeout` with deprecation warning), so existing users aren't affected.
   
   Happy to discuss alternative approaches if you see a simpler path, but I 
believe the semantic separation is the right fix 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