Yeah. While It's a neat little thing, I also doubt it's something very "demanded" by the users - and going a 3rd-party provider route first to see is a good idea I think.
J. On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 7:12 AM Amogh Desai <amoghdesai....@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi David, > > Thanks for reaching out to the community! > > I agree with Elad here too that the use case of the hook might be very > limited as it > offers very limited functionality as per your description. > > Adding it initially as a third party provider and upgrading it if the usage > reaches a certain stage might > be beneficial. > > Thanks & Regards, > Amogh Desai > > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 6:46 PM Elad Kalif <elad...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Hi David, > > > > Thanks for the suggestion. > > I have doubts about the popularity of such providers. > > I suggest you first roll it as 3rd party provider in your own repo (You > can > > add link to it from the Ecosystem page of our site > > > > > https://airflow.apache.org/ecosystem/#third-party-airflow-plugins-and-providers > > ) > > If the provider gets a high volume of downloads (can be checked with > > https://pypistats.org/ ) and is used by many we can raise this again in > > the > > mailing list to discuss ownership transfer and contributing the code from > > your repo to the Airflow repo. > > > > WDYT? > > > > Elad > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 2:35 PM Blain David <david.bl...@infrabel.be> > > wrote: > > > > > Hello Jens, > > > > > > Indeed in our case it's just to query the LDAP repository, but the > > > provider could serve for both purposes as well, so not only to query > but > > > also to be able to be used as a authentication/authoriszation backend > in > > > Airflow. The advantage would be that it could have common code share > > > across both within one provider then. Unless ofc we prefer to have > > > dedicated providers for authentication/authorization of course. > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > David > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Jens Scheffler <j_scheff...@gmx.de.INVALID> > > > Sent: Thursday, 12 December 2024 12:39 > > > To: dev@airflow.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Introduce an Airflow (Open) LDAP provider > > > > > > EXTERNAL MAIL: Indien je de afzender van deze e-mail niet kent en deze > > > niet vertrouwt, klik niet op een link of open geen bijlages. Bij > twijfel, > > > stuur deze e-mail als bijlage naar ab...@infrabel.be<mailto: > > > ab...@infrabel.be>. > > > > > > Hi David, > > > > > > I assume you know and have digested the documentation in > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/PROVIDERS.rst#accepting-new-community-providers > > > we have? > > > > > > If it is a generic functionality I think it is fair to raise the > > > disucssion. It might be very minimal. If you use LDAP just for > > querying... > > > I would fear a bit that the name might be mis-leading if it would be > > called > > > "ldap" because many would assume it is an authentication/authorization > > > backend? In your case it is a data source like any other SQL, correct? > > > > > > Jens > > > > > > On 12.12.24 11:18, Blain David wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > At our company we developed an LDAPHook based on the open-ldap > library > > > > (using the python-ldap wrapper dependency), which allows us to > > > > executed search queries on our ldap and use that data in our DAG's to > > > > do further processing on it. > > > > > > > > The reason why I wrote this hook is because I've first searched > > > > through the airflow repo and didn't find a provider and thus no hook > > > > for it. > > > > > > > > The only thing I could find was this ldap reference in the following > > > > document: > > > > > > > > https://gith/ > > > > ub.com > %2Fapache%2Fairflow%2Fblob%2F3e2b5e2f54ea3b3695e6576313f87460fb0 > > > > > 98830%2Fdocs%2Fapache-airflow%2Fextra-packages-ref.rst%23L64&data=05%7 > > > > C02%7Cdavid.blain%40infrabel.be > %7C9d71cafcbd4b46c0591708dd1aa1e36e%7Cb > > > > > 82bc314ab8e4d6fb18946f02e1f27f2%7C0%7C0%7C638696004790963846%7CUnknown > > > > > %7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4 > > > > > zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=v3mVWvk5GbUVY > > > > Gvfy0MlSUDFNkuEECE%2FqbauBtut2Ng%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > So my question is, would there be acceptance to introduce an > > > > (open)ldap provider in Airflow which offers a Hook and LDAP conn > type? > > > > > > > > At the moment our implementation only offers a search functionality > > > > which behind the scenes does a paged lookup for given base, filter, > > > > attributes, scope and page_size, which for us was sufficient in what > > > > we wanted to achieve, but that could of course be expanded with more > > > > functionality if needed. > > > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > > > David > > > > > > > > ** > > > > > > > > *David Blain* > > > > > > > > Data Engineer /at/ ICT-514 - BI End User Reporting > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@airflow.apache.org > > > > > > > > >
