potiuk commented on issue #35644: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/35644#issuecomment-1821031787
> The same valid with AirflowException, in some circumstances use this exception may lead to catch some internal exceptions which should break something And yes. This is inevitable. It's our job as maintainers to take a calculated risk, whether it's worth risking it when we clarify our intention and leave "other ways" where things can be broken. This is of course extreme case, but it very nicely shows that SemVer and our decisions are never 0/1. It's always continous spectrum of us impacting other workflows. And we should take a decision how far we want to go when we do - actually - clarify our intentions.  And comment on this one: 1) yes, there is a risk 2) yes, it will break someone's workflows with using the exception 3) but I think our intentions were just to signal timeout, and any other interpretation of this exception being implemented this way are not intentional 4) so I am perfectly fine as maintainer to take the risk, change it AND clarify our intentions so that in the future they have less chance of being misinterpreted Of course the only thing you can do is to "attempt" it. People will misinterprete things and will use things in unintended ways (as in the comic above). And you can do absolutely nothing about it. But you can at least make sure that your intentions are clearer and clearer with every iteration. And this should be IMHO our goal with the "Public Interface" page - continue updating it and explaining things every time we find any misinterpretation of it, and sometimes allowe changes even if we know some workflows will be broken, as long as we make sure our intentions are clarified. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
