If we go for separate "slack" "salesforce" "tableau" - (which I am also OK
with - i have no strong opinion), then we just need to create a separate
provider for Tablea'u and de-deprecate the "tableau' extra (plus likely
deprecate Hooks/OPerators from Salesforce (which I see that we actually
have).

I am ok with either solution.

J.


On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 1:46 PM Tomasz Urbaszek <[email protected]>
wrote:

> I'm in favor of separate packages for tableau and slack. Until now I
> didn't know they are owned by salesforce and I would not even dare to look
> for them in salesforce provider.
>
> In my opinion we should prefer user experience over "business
> correctness". While amazon and google are big and most of their products
> have Amazon/Google in name, having one provider for all of them makes sense
> (especially that some libraries are shared).
>
> As per alphabet - we already discussed it (
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/6169#issuecomment-534179100) and
> it seems that sticking to google is more feasible.
>
> Tomek
>
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 1:11 PM Ash Berlin-Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 11 Jan, 2021 at 14:04, Elad Kalif <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> At least for me, most of my ETLs don't use all 3 providers in a single
>> DAG.
>>
>> I'm not sure if most tableau users are aware of it being owned by
>> salesforce, for the end user of tableau it doesn't really mean anything.
>>
>>
>> My thoughts exactly.
>>
>> On Mon, 11 Jan, 2021 at 14:04, Elad Kalif <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> if we are going with the salesforce.crm, salesforce.tableau,
>> salesforce.slack - does it mean that anytime a provider is being bought by
>> another we will need to modify the provider structure?
>>
>>
>> Yes. And this is exactly  why I **dont** want salesforce.crm, but just
>> salesforce, tableau and slack.
>>
>> For instance, look at https://www.tableau.com/ -- it's still a separate
>> entity with it's own marketing identity, with almost no reference to
>> Salesforce.
>>
>> I especially hate the "discoverability" of salesforce.slack  as a name --
>> it doesn't make sense to me.
>>
>>
>>

-- 
+48 660 796 129

Reply via email to