potiuk opened a new issue, #320:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow-steward/issues/320

   **Goal:** Bring Amazon Q Developer CLI (`q`) to feature parity with Claude 
Code as a skill runtime. Grounds: [RFC-AI-0004 Principle 3 — Vendor 
neutrality](../tree/main/docs/rfcs/RFC-AI-0004.md).
   
   **Why Amazon Q:** Default agentic CLI in many AWS-shop environments — 
corporate adopters, federal / regulated environments where Amazon Q is the only 
sanctioned LLM tool. Several ASF projects with AWS-aligned committer bases have 
asked about Q compatibility. Coverage matters less for individual maintainers, 
more for *organisational* adoption.
   
   **What "parity" means:**
   
   - Skills under `.claude/skills/<name>/SKILL.md` are invokable from `q` (Q 
Developer CLI)
   - The `tools/*` bridges are reachable — `q` supports custom tools via its 
agent configuration
   - Sandbox parity: `q` has its own command-permission model (allow-lists, 
"trust" prompts) — document the mapping
   - HITL primitives: `q` supports interactive confirmation for tool use — 
verify and document
   
   **Suggested approach:**
   
   - Map `SKILL.md` → Q's agent configuration format 
(`~/.aws/amazonq/agents/<name>.json` + system prompts)
   - Document skill-invocation pattern
   - Map sandbox parity — `q` allowlists are the native fit for the framework's 
command-permission discipline
   
   **Reference:**
   
   - RFC-AI-0004: 
[`docs/rfcs/RFC-AI-0004.md`](../tree/main/docs/rfcs/RFC-AI-0004.md)
   - Amazon Q Developer CLI: 
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/amazonq/latest/qdeveloper-ug/command-line.html
   - Q agents: 
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/amazonq/latest/qdeveloper-ug/cli-agents.html
   - Existing skill shape: [`.claude/skills/`](../tree/main/.claude/skills/)
   


-- 
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