+1 for separate providers. Extending the Salesforce example, it wouldn’t make sense to me to turn the Segment provider into a module of a Twilio provider, as Segment still exists as its standalone product- it is unlikely that a user would get utility from having both Segment and Twilio modules included in the same package, as they’re rarely building DAGs that would integrate across the two tools (same goes for salesforce/slack/tableau). Also agree that folks shouldn’t need to know or worry about who owns which tool to figure out where providers live.
Pete On Jan 11, 2021, 8:13 AM -0500, Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]>, wrote: > 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
