> This doesn't sound right to me.
I think it could be right if we do two things:
1) ask the user at migration time "Are you using this feature? Are you ok
with changing the default to switch it off" (we can also revert that
question and ask them "are you ok with switching old default to new
>
> would definitely be in favour of that approach and using it more
> liberally. I think SemVer does not say anything about this case - "the
> software still supports it but you need to flip a flg" sounds like a nice
> way of introducing behavioural changes without breaking changes.
This
+1 non binding
I tested some of my example dags on the RC. Things seem to work fine.
Thanks & Regards,
Amogh Desai
On Wed, Sep 6, 2023, 14:35 Avi
wrote:
> +1 non binding
>
> > On Wednesday, Sep 06, 2023 at 09:01, Hussein Awala (mailto:huss...@awala.fr)> wrote:
> > +1 (binding) Tested my
+1 non binding
> On Wednesday, Sep 06, 2023 at 09:01, Hussein Awala (mailto:huss...@awala.fr)> wrote:
> +1 (binding) Tested my changes and ran some testing dags.
>
> On Wed 6 Sep 2023 at 08:23, Phani Kumar
> wrote:
>
> > +1 non binding
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 11:16 AM Rahul Vats wrote:
+1 (binding) Tested my changes and ran some testing dags.
On Wed 6 Sep 2023 at 08:23, Phani Kumar
wrote:
> +1 non binding
>
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 11:16 AM Rahul Vats wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > Tested our example DAGS, looks good!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Rahul Vats
> > 9953794332
> >
+1 non binding
On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 11:16 AM Rahul Vats wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Tested our example DAGS, looks good!
>
> Regards,
> Rahul Vats
> 9953794332
>
>
> On Wed, 6 Sept 2023 at 11:09, Elad Kalif wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> > tested several of my dags. looks good!
> >
> > On
