Hear hear!

Bolke.

> On 24 Mar 2018, at 06:01, Arthur Wiedmer <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Thanks a lot for all the effort Joy!
> 
> Great job!
> 
> Best,
> Arthur
> 
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 6:45 PM, Joy Gao <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Hey guys!
>> 
>> The RBAC UI <https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/3015> has
>> been merged to master. I'm looking forward to early adopters' feedback and
>> bug reports. I also hope to have more folks helping out with the RBAC UI,
>> especially with introducing DAG-Level access control, which is a feature
>> that a lot of people have been asking. If you are interested in helping out
>> with this effort, let's talk more!
>> 
>> This commit will be in the 1.10.0 release, and we are going to maintain
>> both UIs simultaneously for a short period of time. Once RBAC UI is stable
>> and battle-tested, we will deprecate the old UI and eventually remove it
>> from the repo (around Airflow 2.0.0 or 2.1.0 release). This is to prevent
>> two UIs from forking into separate paths, as that would become very
>> difficult to maintain.
>> 
>> Going forward while both UIs are up, if you are making a change to any
>> files in airflow/www/ (old UI), where applicable, please also make the
>> change to the airflow/www_rbac/ (new UI). If you rather not make changes in
>> both UIs, it is recommended that you only make the changes to the RBAC UI,
>> since that is the one we are maintaining in the long term.
>> 
>> I'm excited that the RBAC UI will be able to bring additional security to
>> Airflow, and with FAB framework in place we can look into leveraging it for
>> a unified set of APIs used by both UI and CLI.
>> 
>> Joy
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 11:31 AM, Joy Gao <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi folks,
>>> 
>>> I have a PR <https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/3015> out
>>> for the new UI. I've included instructions on how to test it out in the
>> PR
>>> description. Looking forward to your feedbacks.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Joy
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Joy Gao <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Thanks for the background info. Would be really awesome for you to have
>>>> PyPi access :D I'll make the change to have Airflow Webserver's FAB
>>>> dependency pointing to my fork for the mean time.
>>>> 
>>>> For folks who are interested in RBAC, I will be giving a talk/demo at
>> the Airflow
>>>> Meet-Up
>>>> <https://www.meetup.com/Bay-Area-Apache-Airflow-
>> Incubating-Meetup/events/244525050/>
>>>> next Monday. Happy to chat afterwards about it as well :)
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 8:36 AM, Maxime Beauchemin <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> A bit of related history here:
>>>>> https://github.com/dpgaspar/Flask-AppBuilder/issues/399
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 8:33 AM, Maxime Beauchemin <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Given I have merge rights on FAB I could probably do another round of
>>>>>> review and get your PRs through. I would really like to get the main
>>>>>> maintainer's input on things that touch the core (composite-key
>>>>> support) as
>>>>>> he might have concerns/intuitions that we can't know about.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I do not have Pypi access though so I cannot push new releases out. I
>>>>>> could ask for that.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I've threatened to fork the project before, that's always an option.
>>>>> I've
>>>>>> noticed his involvement is sporadic and comes in bursts.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> In the meantime, you can have the dependency in Airflow Webserver
>>>>> pointing
>>>>>> straight to your fork.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Max
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Joy Gao <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I just created a new webserver instance if you haven't gotten a
>>>>> chance to
>>>>>>> fiddle around with the new web UI and the RBAC configurations
>> (thanks
>>>>>>> Maxime for getting started with this earlier!):
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> http://104.209.38.171:8080/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Admin Account
>>>>>>> username: admin
>>>>>>> password: admin
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Read-Only Account
>>>>>>> username: viewer
>>>>>>> password: password
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Joy Gao <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Thanks for all the feedback regarding to the new Airflow Webserver
>>>>> UI
>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/wepay/airflow-webserver/>! I've been actively
>>>>>>>> addressing all the bugs that were raised on Github. So I want to
>>>>> take
>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>> opportunity to discuss two issues coming up:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The first issue is unaddressed PRs in FAB. If these PRs continue
>> to
>>>>> stay
>>>>>>>> unaddressed, RBAC is blocked from making further progress. If this
>>>>>>> continue
>>>>>>>> to be an issue, I'm inclined to fork FAB, even though it's not
>>>>>>> idealistic.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>   - PR/631 <https://github.com/dpgaspar/
>> Flask-AppBuilder/pull/631>
>>>>>>> Binary
>>>>>>>>   column support (merged, unreleased)
>>>>>>>>   <https://github.com/dpgaspar/Flask-AppBuilder/pull/631>
>>>>>>>>   - PR/639 <https://github.com/dpgaspar/
>> Flask-AppBuilder/pull/639>
>>>>>>> Composite
>>>>>>>>   primary key support (unmerged)
>>>>>>>>   - PR/655 <https://github.com/dpgaspar/
>> Flask-AppBuilder/pull/655>
>>>>>>> Form
>>>>>>>>   prefill support (unmerged)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The second issue is an open question about the next step of
>> Airflow
>>>>>>>> Webserver itself. Here are the 3 potential directions we could
>>>>> take, and
>>>>>>>> I've added my thought on each.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 1. Permanently keep Airflow Webserver as a separated package from
>>>>>>> Airflow,
>>>>>>>> and treat it as another UI option. Keep `www` in Airflow. Allow
>>>>>>> development
>>>>>>>> on both UIs.
>>>>>>>> *I'm not a fan of this. When there is an existing UI in Airflow,
>>>>> most
>>>>>>>> contributors would prefer to maintain the official version that is
>>>>>>>> installed out-of-the-box. **Having a second UI outside of Airflow
>>>>> will
>>>>>>>> make maintaining it very difficult, leading to an eventual death
>> of
>>>>> the
>>>>>>> new
>>>>>>>> UI :(*
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 2. Permanently keep Airflow Webserver as a separated package from
>>>>>>> Airflow,
>>>>>>>> but freeze all development on `www`  and direct all future UI
>>>>>>> development
>>>>>>>> to Airflow Webserver, eventually removing `www` completely when
>>>>> Airflow
>>>>>>>> Webserver is stable.
>>>>>>>> *I'm not a fan of this either. First of all, the views and models
>>>>> are
>>>>>>>> tightly coupled in both old and new UI; until we have a
>> full-fledged
>>>>>>> REST
>>>>>>>> API to build the UI (and cli) on top of it, separating them to a
>>>>>>> separate
>>>>>>>> package now will potentially cause dependency issues and add
>>>>>>> complication
>>>>>>>> to our release cycle. **Secondly, **majority of Airflow users run
>>>>>>> Airflow
>>>>>>>> with the UI; it's one of Airflow's best features. Separating UI
>> out
>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> Airflow core will complicate setup and configuration, while making
>>>>>>> Airflow
>>>>>>>> core less complete.*
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 3. Merge Airflow Webserver back into Airflow as `www2`, freeze all
>>>>>>>> development on `www`, eventually removing `www` completely when
>>>>> `www2`
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> stable.
>>>>>>>> *This makes the most sense to me. Airflow Webserver is developed
>>>>> with
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> goal of feature parity to the current UI, plus additional RBAC
>>>>>>> capability,
>>>>>>>> in hope to replace the old UI completely. Yes, this means there
>>>>> will be
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> short period of having to maintain two UIs, but once we freeze
>>>>>>> development
>>>>>>>> on www, it shouldn't be a concern for long.*
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I'd love to hear everyone's thoughts on this! I'm excited about
>>>>> bringing
>>>>>>>> RBAC to airflow and I hope it's something others will find useful
>> as
>>>>>>> well!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> Joy
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Joy Gao <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thank you everyone for the active feedback so far, and thanks for
>>>>>>> setting
>>>>>>>>> up the demo Maxime!
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Going to work on pruning through the issues in the upcoming days.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Fokko/Maxime, do you recall the SQLAlchemy Exception message so I
>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>> look into it? Otherwise I'll wait until it's down again =P
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Joy
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 9:35 AM, Maxime Beauchemin <
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I just restarted it, not sure how long it will take to get in a
>>>>> bad
>>>>>>> state
>>>>>>>>>> again...
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Max
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 11:55 PM, Driesprong, Fokko
>>>>>>> <[email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Good morning,
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> The demo provided by Max is down, it throws a
>>>>> SQLAlchemyexception
>>>>>>> :'(
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, Fokko
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-11-18 19:14 GMT+01:00 Chris Riccomini <
>>>>> [email protected]>:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> @bolke, open issues on the Github repo, please.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Bolke de Bruin <
>>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chris,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you want us to report bugs somewhere (I have
>> encountered
>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> few)? Or
>>>>>>>>>>>>> just generic user experiences posted here?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bolke
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 18 Nov 2017, at 00:47, Chris Riccomini <
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey all,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I know the weekend is coming up, and for those of us in
>>>>> the
>>>>>>> US,
>>>>>>>>>> next
>>>>>>>>>>>> week
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a bit of a slow holiday week. Would love to get some
>>>>>>> feedback
>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everyone on this. The goal would ideally to be to
>>>>> converge on
>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eventually replace the existing Airflow UI with this
>> one.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Joy Gao <
>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi guys.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've been working on moving airflow from Flask-Admin to
>>>>>>>>>>>> Flask-AppBuilder
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for RBAC
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Airflow+RBAC+proposal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> check it out at https://github.com/wepay/airfl
>>>>> ow-webserver.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's still a work-in-progress, but most features you
>> see
>>>>> in
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> webserver
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> UI today is available there. For those who are
>>>>> interested in
>>>>>>>>>> RBAC,
>>>>>>>>>>> I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>> love
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get some early feedback in terms of the following:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - New Flask-AppBuilder UI (any bugs/regressions)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Setup issues
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Ease of integration with third party auth (i.e. LDAP,
>>>>> AD,
>>>>>>>>>> OAuth,
>>>>>>>>>>>> etc.)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Any other thoughts/concerns
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks a lot!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Joy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 

Reply via email to