Seems like we are converging :). I prepared an issue describing it. Let me know if that looks good (seems that we can have backwards-compatible snowflake provider 1.0.1 if we do it well).
https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/13614 I am happy to help if we agree anyone wants to take that issue. J. On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 4:00 PM Kaxil Naik <[email protected]> wrote: > Talked with Ash and yes I think it make sense as a separate provider. A > good example is Google -- It is under Alphabet Inc but Google itself is a > separate entity and different from its other services like Google Fiber. > > I am happy for them to be separate providers > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 2:36 PM Peter DeJoy <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 for separate providers. Extending the Salesforce example, it wouldn’t >> make sense to me to turn the Segment provider >> <https://github.com/apache/airflow/tree/master/airflow/providers/segment> >> 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 >> >> -- +48 660 796 129
