Precisely my thinking - it's not really "we do not have the information"
but "It's hard to discover that we have it".

On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 10:59 AM Javier Lopez <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I agree with you. I think if you are new to airflow, you won't find those
> options for the providers unless you specifically search for them, which is
> unlikely because you may not even know that they exist.
>
> On Fri, 13 Aug 2021 at 03:48, Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> I think in Airflow 2 it's  hard to find what kind of options you have for
>> logs, secrets, authentication.
>>
>> For all those, we do not have a single place where people could gather
>> all the options and where people can find them easily. I think complete
>> separation out of particular logs, secrets to providers and defferring most
>> authentication information to FAB (without being explicit about it) made it
>> quite difficult to find how to do it all.
>>
>> I've learned that people are finding better answers in Stack Overflow
>> questions than in our documentation and this is not a good sign. Example
>> slack discussion for LDAP authentication
>> https://apache-airflow.slack.com/archives/CCQ7EGB1P/p1628782373128600
>> which ended up with recommendation to
>> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/65946118/how-to-setup-ldap-authentication-in-airflow-2-0
>> (but there were many more of those)
>>
>> Also it's not really easy to figure out configuring Oauth - I struggled
>> with it myself few weeks ago and figured it out eventually, but still not
>> fully (role mapping is not explained anywhere for one - at least not that I
>> am aware of).
>>
>> When I searched for anything useful, more often than not I was redirected
>> to Airflow 1.10 documentation that had some kind of overview of possible
>> options. But it's not really existing in Airflow.
>>
>> I cannot find pages summarising the available (Airflow community managed)
>> deployment options such as remote log configuration. Some details (but
>> without comprehensive examples) are available in providers (which is a good
>> place for example the remote loggers belong to their providers), but you
>> need to know you should look for them there - and it is not at all obvious.
>>
>> I think it would be great to extend our documentation pages with:
>>
>> * Available  Authentication options with examples (even if most of the
>> documentation is in FAB, it is rather difficult to map Airflow
>> configuration into FAB one - at least it's not obvious which part is FAB,
>> which part is Airflow, where to put what, how to configure roles etc.):
>> LDAP, Oauth, Google, .......
>>
>> * List (and link) available logging options at
>> https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow/stable/logging-monitoring/logging-tasks.html?highlight=remote%20log#advanced-configuration
>> .You will not find list of implemented integrations in this page - you
>> should look for details of advanced logging in providers (but it's not at
>> all obvious where and that they exist at all). There are no links to S3/GCS
>> logging configuration/handling and it's not easy to find out where you
>> should look for them. Better examples would also be useful.
>>
>> * Secret Backends page is a bit better -
>> https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow/stable/security/secrets/secrets-backend/index.html.
>> At least it mentions GCP/Hashicorp as "examples" but it misses AWS one and
>> when you go to "Supported Backends" you see only the "Local Filesystem"one.
>> I think it is really misleading that you do not have a full list of secret
>> backends in the community-managed providers.
>>
>> I think in all those cases there was a good intention - not to repeat
>> what is written somewhere else and not to add "all community providers
>> specific implementation", because they are separated out and we should
>> treat the providers as "separate" from core and put documentation there.
>>
>> However I think the usefulness of the documentation suffered by this
>> change- some level of redundancy and making useful information in the place
>> where people are looking for it rather than somewhere else where it is "the
>> single source of truth" is not the best idea for the useful documentation.
>> While this is OK for "operators/sensors" etc. as this is pretty "obvious"
>> they are in "providers", when it comes to common features such as
>> authentication, logging, secrets, I think having single page with
>> comprehensive overview what is available for those is rather useful
>>
>> I'd love to hear other's opinion -maybe it's just me,  but I would prefer
>> to see in one place all the options I have with authentication, logging
>> configuration, secrets - at least nicely indexed with comprehensive list of
>> options I have for the community and links to the exact places where more
>> details are provided.
>>
>> Let me know what you think.
>>
>> J.
>>
>> --
>> +48 660 796 129
>>
>

-- 
+48 660 796 129

Reply via email to