I cleaned-up the CWiki : https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Airflow+Home. It looks much better now.
- Airflow 2.0 - Planning - Airflow Approach For Releases - Airflow Improvements Proposals - Announcements - File lists - To be moved The "outdated" pages are all under "Archived" page that is moved out of the main "Airflow Home" tree. You can still find them <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Archives> but they are not easily reachable from the home page. They have all [ARCHIVED] in the title. I also moved important pages under "To be moved" page and added relevant issues in GitHub: - Committers' Guide [TODO: Move to CONTRIBUTING.rst] https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/10179 - Common Pitfalls [TODO: Move to Docs] https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/10180 - Community Guidelines [TODO: Move to CONTRIBUTING.rst] https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/10181 - Contributors' Guide [TODO: Move to CONTRIBUTING.rst] https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/10187 - First time contributor's workshop [TODO: Move to apache.airflow.org] https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/10182 - Releasing Airflow [TODO: Move to repo] https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/10183 - Roles [TODO: Move to CONTRIBUTING.rst] https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/10184 - Scheduler Basics [TODO: Move to Docs] https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/10185 - Tips and Tricks for Oracle Shops [TODO: Move to Docs] https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/10186 J. On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 6:49 PM Kamil Breguła <kamil.breg...@polidea.com> wrote: > +1 Perfect! > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 6:15 PM Jarek Potiuk <jarek.pot...@polidea.com> > wrote: > > > What do you think ? https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/10176 (I > > pinned it) > > > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 2:10 PM Jarek Potiuk <jarek.pot...@polidea.com> > > wrote: > > > > > I love the idea with Pinned Issue keeping "current initiatives". > > > > > > TL;DR; Summarizing the current proposal > > > > > > * We keep pretty much everything in labelled Github Issues (including > > > "meta" issues) > > > * We disable back Wiki in Github > > > * We have a pinned issue with "Current Initiatives" linked > > > * We cleanup CWiki move it/remove outdated info and the only thing that > > > stays there, for now, are: > > > * "Announcements" (which we might later move to airflow.apache.org > ) > > > * Process description for Airflow 2.0 > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Airflow+2.0+-+Planning > > > * AIPs > > > > > > If everyone is happy with this approach I am happy to make it happen > :). > > > > > > J. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:35 PM Kamil Breguła < > kamil.breg...@polidea.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> 1. I do not see a problem. Issues may have a prefix in the title, > which > > >> will allow us to easily find them. > > >> > > >> Release - Airflow 2.0 > > >> Release - Airflow 1.10 > > >> AIP-32 - API > > >> AIP-XXX - Docker Image/Helm Chart > > >> AIP-XXX - XXXX > > >> > > >> However, I do not mind using labels in this case. > > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/labels/AIP-31 > > >> > > >> 2. I think we can use the pinned issues. This will allow you to find > > them > > >> easily because they will be closer to the tickets. > > >> > > >> > > > https://docs.github.com/en/github/managing-your-work-on-github/pinning-an-issue-to-your-repository > > >> > > >> This feature has a significant limitation as we can only pin 3 issues, > > but > > >> I think we can benefit from it as it will be easy to stay organized. > To > > >> overcome this limitation, one of the items may be indexed with the > > >> currently running projects. For now, I've pinned an issue with > Airflow > > >> 2.0 > > >> release info so we can see what it looks like. When we like it, we can > > >> create an index and pin it. I think it will be much newer friendly > than > > >> WIKI. WDYT? > > >> > > >> Best regards, > > >> Kamil > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> . > > >> > > >> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 11:49 AM Jarek Potiuk < > jarek.pot...@polidea.com> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> > I think it describes very well what we discussed so far. I have two > > >> points > > >> > to add: > > >> > > > >> > 1) Using Milestone: > > >> > > > >> > I prefer to keep milestones to only mark stuff for global releases > of > > >> > Airflow and nothing else. If we use Milestones for SIG groups this > > will > > >> > become unmanageable (and I know Milestones are used by the release > > >> > management scripts to verify if everything marked for release is > > already > > >> > merged). > > >> > > > >> > 2) CWiki vs. Github Wiki and Index of "Currently running Airflow > > >> > initiatives" > > >> > > > >> > Another thing that I wanted to add is whether we use both wikis (or > > one > > >> > only) after cleanup I proposed. > > >> > I think CWiki is better for design docs/discussions etc. - it has > > >> diagram > > >> > support built-in and a few other features that make it easier to > have > > >> > better "design" discussion. Github Wiki is very poor. > > >> > I agree that Github issues are great for most of the stuff. But I > > think > > >> we > > >> > could use Github Wiki to keep index with links to the issues + one > > >> sentence > > >> > of explanation for those more "permanent" and long-running "meta" > > >> > issues.I'd call it "Currently running Airflow initiatives": > > >> > > > >> > What I can see there currently is: > > >> > > > >> > * Airflow 2.0 Progress > > >> > * Backport Release 2nd wave > > >> > * Quarantine Issues (master, v1-10-test, v1-10-stable) > > >> > * Refactors and cleanups > > >> > * Pylint > > >> > * MyPy > > >> > * ... > > >> > * SIG Groups > > >> > * link to meta-issue for each SIG Group > > >> > > > >> > This would be a great point for newcomers to have a look of what's > > >> going on > > >> > currently in Airflow without having to look at 500 issues. It might > be > > >> > obvious for more seasoned committers that those initiatives are in > > >> progress > > >> > but you would not know that before you go into details of individual > > >> "meta" > > >> > issues (and you'd have to know that there are those meta issues in > the > > >> > first place). i think it's much more discoverable if we just have > one > > >> page > > >> > in Github Wiki with those. > > >> > > > >> > WDYT? > > >> > > > >> > J. > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Jarek Potiuk > > > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer > > > > > > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129> > > > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/> > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Jarek Potiuk > > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer > > > > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129> > > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/> > > > -- Jarek Potiuk Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129> [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/>
