+1 binding. Excited to see this get pushed over the line -ash
> On 17 May 2026, at 05:00, Wei Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > Thanks all for the great discussion and for helping shape it better as a > community! > > Best, > Wei > >> On May 17, 2026, at 10:39 AM, Aaron Chen <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> Really nice feature! >> >> Best, >> Aaron >> >> On Sat, May 16, 2026 at 6:38 PM Shivam Rastogi <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> +1 (non-binding) >>> >>> I successfully tested the coordinator with my TypeScript SDK. I also ran a >>> DAG that mixed Java, TypeScript, and Python tasks in a single pipeline, >>> exchanging data via XCom across all three runtimes. Every task ran >>> successfully end-to-end. >>> >>> @TP and @Jason Do you think we can include the typescript sdk as part of >>> this AIP or will it require a separate AIP? In my opinion, it >>> doesn't require a new AIP as it will be an extension of the coordinator. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Shivam Rastogi >>> >>> On Sat, 16 May 2026 at 11:36, Stefan Wang <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> +1 (non-binding). >>>> >>>> Thanks TP and Jason >>>> >>>> — really appreciate the way the discussion feedback got worked into the >>>> design, and the coordinator-interface shape that came out the other side. >>>> >>>> Excited to see this land as the foundation for native multi-language task >>>> support in Airflow. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Stefan >>>> >>>> >>>>> On May 16, 2026, at 3:30 AM, Zhe-You(Jason) Liu <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi TP, Jens, Jarek, and all, >>>>> >>>>> +1 (binding) from me as well. >>>>> >>>>> I really appreciate all the thoughtful feedback and comments from >>>> everyone >>>>> that helped make AIP-108 and the coordinator interface more concrete. I >>>>> look forward to the coordinator interface becoming a strong foundation >>>> for >>>>> native multi-language task support in Airflow and for future language >>>>> integrations as well. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks everyone! >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> Jason >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, May 16, 2026 at 6:27 PM Phani Kumar via dev < >>>> [email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> +1 (binding). Thanks TP, Jarek, Jens and Jason for the discussion and >>>>>> alignment. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, May 16, 2026 at 3:26 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> +1 (binding) -> Thanks for being receptive to all comments TP / >>> Jason. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And regarding Jens' point: yes, "naming is difficult". However, at >>> this >>>>>>> stage, this name is just a "codename" because it's "Java only," >>>>>>> "experimental," mostly used internally (except for the package name >>> in >>>>>>> configuration), and lacks a separate installable distribution (it's >>>> just >>>>>> a >>>>>>> Python package name). When/If we turn it (hopefully soon) into >>>>>> full-fledged >>>>>>> coordinators - with common APIs and a compatibility strategy—it >>>> **might** >>>>>>> get real "coordinator" features; this might get handy. It might also >>> be >>>>>>> easier to "promote it" without migrations, which TP was rightfully >>>>>>> concerned about. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So, I actually like that it's named "coordinators" now in the Python >>>>>>> package name because it allows for easy future evolution without >>>>>>> unnecessary migration issues. I was far more sceptical about >>>> implementing >>>>>>> the new distribution naming schema at this point - because that would >>>>>>> "anchor" us much more. I think our discussion resulted in a good >>> middle >>>>>>> ground: we avoid overcomplicating things (especially the development >>>>>>> process, operational complexity, and intra-compatibility issues), >>>>>> allowing >>>>>>> us to get something "working" quickly, while ensuring we aren't >>> blocked >>>>>> and >>>>>>> have a smooth path to implement the longer-term vision later. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think that was a very good discussion and outcome. Thanks again, >>> TP. >>>>>>> Also, thanks to (a bit more silent in this discussion) Jason for >>> being >>>> so >>>>>>> flexible. I really appreciate it. I know firsthand how difficult it >>> is >>>>>> when >>>>>>> a bigger vision you have is kind of trimmed-down, and when you see >>>> where >>>>>>> you want to go and others seem to "not see it". It forces you to >>> twist >>>>>> and >>>>>>> turn things to not lose the track of the bigger vision, while taking >>>> the >>>>>>> first baby step toward it. But my experience is that the end result >>>> might >>>>>>> eventually benefit from learnings along the way, so trimming the >>> first >>>>>>> steps is a good thing (even if it's very difficult mentally). I've >>> been >>>>>>> doing it for years in our dev environment. While it generally follows >>>> my >>>>>>> initial vision, it's very different now due to incremental steps and >>>>>>> tooling improvements along the way. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> J. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, May 16, 2026 at 10:52 AM Shahar Epstein <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 (binding), well done TP and Jason. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Shahar >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sat, May 16, 2026 at 10:02 AM Tzu-ping Chung via dev < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I’m calling vote on AIP-108: Java Task SDK and the Language >>>>>> Coordinator >>>>>>>>> Layer >>>>>>>>> AIP-108 Java Task SDK and the Language Coordinator Layer - Airflow >>> - >>>>>>>>> Apache Software Foundation < >>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/pY4mGQ> >>>>>>>>> cwiki.apache.org <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/pY4mGQ> >>>>>>>>> [image: favicon.ico] <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/pY4mGQ >>>> >>>>>>>>> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/pY4mGQ> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Discussion thread: >>>>>>>>> lists.apache.org >>>>>>>>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread/gjot4bxj9kygj2fk76kx6tyg8s4hr057> >>>>>>>>> [image: favicon.ico] >>>>>>>>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread/gjot4bxj9kygj2fk76kx6tyg8s4hr057> >>>>>>>>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread/gjot4bxj9kygj2fk76kx6tyg8s4hr057> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The vote will run for 5 days until Thursday, 21st May 2026, 07:00 >>>> UTC. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Everyone is encouraged to vote, but only PMC members and >>> Committers' >>>>>>>>> votes are considered binding. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Please vote accordingly >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Approve >>>>>>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion >>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Consider this my +1 vote (binding) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> TP >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >>>> >>> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
