We do not have (or at least I am not aware of) the Tableau operators - but if we have them, I am rather ok with having a separate provider.
I am also for making it 'salescorce.crm, 'salesforce.tableau' salesforce.slack' providers if we think it makes sense. It would be akin to what we have with microsoft: `microstoft.azure`, `microsoft.winrm`, `microsoft.mssql` We can make new versions of those providers soon and release nev versions of those, even add deprecated links from old 'salesforce' providers like we did when we migrated from 1.10. J. On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 12:45 PM Kaxil Naik <[email protected]> wrote: > My 2 cents: > > Personally, I would like `salesforce.tableau` (and `salesforce.crm`). This > makes it easier to have a single rule that Providers are Grouped via Org / > Owner at the top level, but further grouped via Product line. > > Otherwise, it get's a bit confusing, both from a Dev and User standpoint > to know what goes where. > > Regards, > Kaxil > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 11:34 AM Ash Berlin-Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > >> re: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/13595 >> >> So, Salesforce have bought Tableau and Slack. >> >> But they are entirely unrelated products -- users of the Slack hooks are >> unlikely to want to do anything with the Salesforce CRM suite of tools, so >> I think our naming should be along "product" lines/groups, not who owns a >> particular service. >> >> For instance I think we should have three providers: >> >> slack >> tableau >> salesforce >> >> And not one mega salesforce provider, nor should we have >> salesforce.salesforce, salesforce.slack, and salesforce.tableau providers. >> >> This is partly because "salesforce" is both a company/product name (the >> CRM), but more generally, I think grouping only makes sense for >> sub-products, not around who owns the service because after all, that can >> change -- >> https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/01/tech/saleforce-buys-slack/index.html >> >> Thoughts? >> >> I am strongly +1 for moving tableau back out to it's own provider, and >> would prefer we had `tableau`, but would grudgingly prefer >> `salesforce.tableau` (and `salesforce.crm`) over having both live in the >> `salesforce` provider. >> >> -ash >> >> >> -- +48 660 796 129
