want to point out is, for the provider to actually be helpful, it
>>> must
>>> >> be
>>> >>> treated a bit differently from normal providers, but more like a
>>> separate
>>> >>> third-party dependency. Specifically, the prov
Dr. Markus Heyn, Dr. Frank Meyer,
>> Dr.
>> >>>>> Tanja Rückert
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> -Original Message-
>> >>>>> From: Jarek Potiuk
>> >>>>> Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Februar 2024 21:
ntially
> >>> more difficult to maintain, so I’d settle for one utility provider for
> >> now
> >>> and split further if needed in the future.
> >>>
> >>> TP
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On 22 Feb 2024, at 10:10, Scheffler Jens (XC-
;>> @Uranusjr would this help as a pilot in your AIP-60 code to parse and
>>> validate URIs for datasets?
>>>>
>>>> Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards
>>>>
>>>> Jens Scheffler
>>>>
>>>> Alliance: Enabler
/EAE-ADA-T)
> > > Robert Bosch GmbH | Hessbruehlstraße 21 | 70565 Stuttgart-Vaihingen |
> > GERMANY | www.bosch.com
> > > Tel. +49 711 811-91508 | Mobil +49 160 90417410 |
> > jens.scheff...@de.bosch.com
> > >
> > > Sitz: Stuttgart, Registergericht: Amtsge
ratsvorsitzender: Prof. Dr. Stefan Asenkerschbaumer;
> > Geschäftsführung: Dr. Stefan Hartung, Dr. Christian Fischer, Dr. Markus
> Forschner,
> > Stefan Grosch, Dr. Markus Heyn, Dr. Frank Meyer, Dr. Tanja Rückert
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jarek
Dr. Stefan Hartung, Dr. Christian Fischer, Dr. Markus
> Forschner,
> Stefan Grosch, Dr. Markus Heyn, Dr. Frank Meyer, Dr. Tanja Rückert
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jarek Potiuk
> Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Februar 2024 00:53
> To: dev@airflow.apache.org
> Subject: R
,
Stefan Grosch, Dr. Markus Heyn, Dr. Frank Meyer, Dr. Tanja Rückert
-Original Message-
From: Jarek Potiuk
Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Februar 2024 00:53
To: dev@airflow.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Common.util provider?
Yep. It could work with symbolic links. Tested it and with flit - both
//eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F
> > aka.ms%2Fo0ukef=05%7C02%7CJens.Scheffler%40de.bosch.com%7C98c8897
> > 195d944d483ab08dc331a49bb%7C0ae51e1907c84e4bbb6d648ee58410f4%7C0%7C0%7
> > C638441435197193656%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIj
> >
Markus
Forschner,
Stefan Grosch, Dr. Markus Heyn, Dr. Frank Meyer, Dr. Tanja Rückert
-Original Message-
From: Jarek Potiuk
Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Februar 2024 21:18
To: dev@airflow.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Common.util provider?
> if we have a common piece then we are locking all
a single
> place but keep individual providers fully independent…
>
> Jens
>
> Sent from Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
>
> From: Jarek Potiuk
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 5:42:20 PM
> To: dev@airflow.apache.org
> Sub
…
Jens
Sent from Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
From: Jarek Potiuk
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 5:42:20 PM
To: dev@airflow.apache.org
Subject: [DISCUSS] Common.util provider?
Hello everyone,
How do we feel about introducing a common.util pr
Hello everyone,
How do we feel about introducing a common.util provider?
I know it's not been the original idea behind providers, but - after
testing common.sql and now also having common.io, seems like more and more
we would like to extract some common code that we would like providers to
use,
13 matches
Mail list logo
