+1 for this moving it. It gives us more flexibility on both the core and 
provider sides.

Best,
Wei

> On Nov 17, 2023, at 9:15 AM, Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> I am all for it. As we saw already and we see it more in the future -
> moving code of out of Airflow core to provider and having separate
> provider's release cycle and lifecycle is generally beneficial:
> 
> * dependencies can be more decoupled - even if we pin FAB with a particular
> version of provider, our users can freely change provider version
> without updating airflow and the other way round - update airflow without
> changing provider version (thus without changing FAB).
> * we will be able to remove FAB in the future from active maintenance -
> similarly to discussed dask executor we can stop maintaining FAB provider
> in the future (no plans now of course - but it might happen - especially if
> we will implement a way to migrate current USER/ROLE of FAB to something
> else
> 
> I think we've learned already a lot on how to manage lifecycle of providers
> and have a number of tools and processes, so I think it will not be too
> problematic.
> 
> J.
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 9:46 PM Beck, Vincent <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> I am sending this email to gather feedbacks/concerns on what is going to
>> happen regarding AIP-56 (
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/AIP-56+Extensible+user+management).
>> The majority of the work related to AIP-56 is now completed. As a summary,
>> all the code related to user authentication and user authorization has been
>> packaged in a new component called "FAB auth manager" (
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/airflow/auth/managers/fab/fab_auth_manager.py).
>> Now, all user authentication and user authorization operations are done in
>> this FAB auth manager. The purpose of having this new component is to be
>> able to plug (and/or create) another "auth manager" if desired.
>> 
>> For simplification reasons, this FAB auth manager is still in core Airflow
>> under "airflow.auth.managers.fab" (
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/tree/main/airflow/auth/managers/fab)
>> but the ultimate plan is to move the module "airflow.auth.managers.fab" to
>> a new provider. Of course, this new provider would still be installed by
>> default in Airflow and will have no impact for the users.
>> 
>> An issue had been created for that work and a discussion has started but I
>> wanted to increase the audience and potentially get more feedbacks/concerns
>> before actually doing so: https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/32210.
>> In this issue you will also find the motivations behind moving this code to
>> a new provider.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Vincent
>> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to