> I would say we should only worry about backcompat when there's something to worry about.
I think Daniel is quite right. In this case what **would** happen if someone relies on `try AirflowException`, the issue would be immediate to see and easy to fix (and we can describe it in release notes as significant news. I can't easily think of a "reasonable" case where behaviour would be changed without crashing. I think that would be a blocker if we can have a reasonable way of using it that might change the behaviour in a way that is difficult to notice by the user, but when I think of potential cases I cannot imagine usage that could lead to it. J On Wed, Aug 27, 2025 at 3:31 PM Daniel Standish <daniel.stand...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote: > Generally agree with this. > > I would say we should only worry about backcompat when there's something to > worry about. > > Like, if there's just a remote possibility that a user is doing something > weird (e.g. in some subclass they wrote of something) then, not really for > us to worry about. Seems rather internal behavior generally. > > If we *know* for sure changing it will break airflow for certain > combinations that should work, that's something to address. >
