Jason,

I am 100% for that. I've been thinking about this very thing but never had
time to act on it. I totally agree that makes perfect sense. Having some of
the GSoC people to work on it would be great because they might come with
new perspectives - and even improve or change Breeze if adapting to it
proves too difficult for agents.

I would even love to co-mentor it with you if you take the lead. Having a
co-mentor is always great for coverage when people are unavailable or very
busy.

J.



On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 10:02 AM Zhe-You Liu <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Jarek,
>
> I have a small project idea similar to the recent “airflow-translation”
> agent skill: an “airflow-breeze-contribution” /
> “airflow-contribution-verification” agent skill (maybe a better name would
> also mention “prek”).
>
> Breeze is definitely one of the most powerful CI and developer tools we
> have. However, in my experience, these agents (Claude Code, Gemini CLI,
> GitHub Copilot–like IDE or CLI tooling) aren’t smart enough to use Breeze
> as an environment that matches the correct, reproducible GitHub CI
> environment. Even though we have added `AGENTS.md` and mention the
> contribution docs in it, it doesn’t really seem to work. It mostly serves
> as extra context and just increases the context window IMHO.
>
> The expected results of the project would be:
>
> 1. The AI tools should be smart enough to leverage Breeze.
> 2. The AI tools should **respect the Breeze environment** and **be able to
> distinguish whether the current session is inside Breeze or not**, so they
> can decide whether to run host commands (e.g. ‎`breeze start-airflow`),
> commands inside the container (e.g. ‎`pytest` or ‎`airflow ...`), or even
> jump out of Breeze container to run some host commands then jump back into
> the Breeze container.
> 3. Ensure consistency between the new skills and the Breeze CLI via
> automated static checks (maybe using the “prek” mechanism to automatically
> sync Breeze CLI docstrings to the correct paths for the agent skills), so
> that the Breeze CLI remains the single source of truth.
>
> Here’s the typical workflow of my development journey after making all the
> changes in a PR, which might be helpful when drafting the agent skills:
>
> Scenario 1) Make sure all the static checks pass
>
> 1. Stage all the changes with ‎`git`.
> 2. Run ‎`prek`, then fix all the static check errors.
>
> Scenario 2) Make sure all the relevant unit tests in the current PR pass
>
> 1. Run ‎`breeze shell` to start the Breeze container as a clean testing
> environment.
> 2. Run ‎`pytest` with a partial path to the modules/classes instead of
> running the full test suite in the same terminal session.
>
> Scenario 3) Verify the system behavior
>
> 1. Add a new Dag related to the new feature or bug.
> 2. Run ‎`breeze start-airflow` (possibly with third-party system
> integration via the ‎`--integration` flag).
> 3. Trigger the DagRun in the UI (although for the agent mode we should use
> a CLI trigger instead, for simplicity purposes).
> 4. Verify whether there are any errors across the components.
>
> I’m not sure whether adding this agent skill and making our AI tools
> respect the Breeze environment would be a suitable project for GSoC or
> not.I would appreciate any suggestions on this project idea and whether the
> overall direction makes sense to everyone.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Best,
> Jason
>
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 4:22 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hello dear Airflow community,
> >
> > Apache Software Foundattion has been officially accepted as a Google
> > Summer of Code organisation and if you would have an idea for a
> > project, that could be done by participants of the GSOC -  there is
> > still time to volunteer and add some project that you would like to
> > run.
> >
> > Mentoring in GSOC is really something that is best suited for
> > committers who have some small-ish projects in mind, with clear ideas
> > of what needs to be done. These projects should not require extensive
> > Airflow knowledge from those participants, and failure to complete
> > them should not be critical, although completion would be beneficial.
> >
> > Mentoring usually requires some time, but not much - and I personally
> > would say - this is a very rewarding experience. I've personally
> > gained many friendships from mentorships I've done, people grew when I
> > was mentoring them and I have tear-shedding stories about some of the
> > mentorships I run. This includes a talk at Community Over Code where
> > my mentee from Peru (and a few other PMC members' mentees) described
> > her story: she went from being low and depressed while supporting her
> > mother to becoming an experienced developer advocate with good job and
> > great stability—on a UK talent visa. At the end of the talk she
> > thanked her mother for supporting her—she brought her mother to the
> > conference and her mother witnessed the talk in person.
> >
> > Those are things you can't buy with money, or learn, you need to
> > experience them and let them happen. And for that you need to give it
> > a chance.
> >
> > So if you would like to participate, submit your project here and read
> > more about GSOC:
> >
> > https://community.apache.org/gsoc/guide-to-being-a-mentor.html
> >
> > Also, for those who would like to be mentors, I offer something
> > myself. Since I've been a mentor quite a few times, I am super happy
> > to help new mentors. I volunteer to "mentor the mentors" and am happy
> > to privately discuss and meet with those who want to take on
> > mentorship and help them become great mentors.
> >
> > Also maybe other past mentors would join me in that. We had quite a
> > few mentors in various past programs, and I am sure their experience
> > is similar to mine.
> >
> > J.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to