Well, I wouldn't touch the on that exist (maybe we could mark them deprecated, but that's all). But I would move (copy) them together and make them consistent (example, let them all use the same default connection_id, ...). For a new user it's quite confusing I think due to different reasons (style, etc...) you know we have an old ticket: making gcp consistent (I just don't want to start on this on, on fear of breaking something).
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 4:59 PM Chris Riccomini <[email protected]> wrote: Hmm. What advantages would this provide? I'm a little nervous about breaking compatibility. We have a bunch of DAGs which import all kinds of GCP hooks and operators. Wouldn't want those to move. On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 7:54 AM, Alex Van Boxel <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm starting to write some very exotic Operators that are a bit strange > adding to contrib. Examples of this are: > > + See if a Compute snapshot of a disc is created > + See if a string appears on the serial port of Compute instance > > but they would be a nice addition if we had a Google Compute plugin (or any > other cloud provider, AWS, Azure, ...). I'm not talking about getting cloud > support out of the main source tree. No, I'm talking about grouping them > together in a consistent part. We can even start adding macro's etc. This > would be a good opportunity to move all the GCP operators together, making > them consistent without braking the existing operators that exist in > *contrib*. > > Here are a few requirements that I think of: > > - separate folder ( example <airflow>/integration/googlecloud , > <airflow>/integration/aws > , <airflow>/integration/azure ) > - enable in config (don't want to load integrations I don't use) > - based on Plugin (same interface) > > Thoughts?
