jason810496 opened a new pull request, #70657:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/70657

   # Put the Coordinator path first in the non-Python SDK docs
   
   - related: follow-up to #69750 (review discussion 
https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/69750#discussion_r3564094902)
   
   ## Why
   
   The "Non-Python language SDKs" overview framed a false split (Go as a 
standalone edge worker, Java as the Coordinator), but both language SDKs run 
through the same Coordinator layer, which is the recommended first-class path; 
the Go edge worker is a secondary mode still missing several 
Supervisor-provided features.
   
   ## How
   
   - Reframe the section intro so the Coordinator layer is the shared 
first-class integration for Java, Go, and upcoming language SDKs, and the Go 
edge worker is a second, standalone mode.
   - Present "Coordinator (Java and Go), recommended" first 
(`CoordinatorManager` -> `SubprocessCoordinator` -> `JavaCoordinator` / 
`ExecutableCoordinator`, driving a language bundle subprocess over loopback-TCP 
msgpack while the Supervisor proxies every Execution-API call), then demote the 
Go edge worker to an alternative and note the features it lacks (non-default 
task states, remote task logs, alternate XCom backends).
   - Generalize the two former Java-only diagrams into shared Coordinator 
diagrams (architecture + sequence) covering both languages, and rename the 
native-language diagram to the Go edge worker it now represents.
   
   ---
   
   ##### Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?
   
   - [x] Yes, with help of Claude Code (Opus 4.8) following [the 
guidelines](https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/contributing-docs/05_pull_requests.rst#gen-ai-assisted-contributions)
   


-- 
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