Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improves documentation regarding providers and custom connections #13375

Merged

Conversation

soltanianalytics
Copy link
Contributor

@soltanianalytics soltanianalytics commented Dec 29, 2020

I had some issues figuring out how to make custom connections work. Thankfully, @potiuk was very supportive in the airflow slack channel and helped me out. I'm happy to contribute to the docs in a way that I believe I would have found very helpful initially.

In particular:

  • The How to create your own provider section should be on the main level, otherwise it is easy to overlook and also is confusing with the very similarly named Creating your own providers subsection of the FAQ for Airflow and Providers - especially since you may be linked to this page from the connection page, looking for information on, well, creating your own providers
  • I added a verbose section on what exactly to do to make a package a provider
  • I took the liberty to also make some minor language improvements wherever I stumbled across an opportunity to do so

Please feel free to use it as-is, make any additional changes, or ignore my suggestions altogether.

Big thanks again to @potiuk for helping me out! The custom connections feature in particular is pretty cool!

@boring-cyborg
Copy link

boring-cyborg bot commented Dec 29, 2020

Congratulations on your first Pull Request and welcome to the Apache Airflow community! If you have any issues or are unsure about any anything please check our Contribution Guide (https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.rst)
Here are some useful points:

  • Pay attention to the quality of your code (flake8, pylint and type annotations). Our pre-commits will help you with that.
  • In case of a new feature add useful documentation (in docstrings or in docs/ directory). Adding a new operator? Check this short guide Consider adding an example DAG that shows how users should use it.
  • Consider using Breeze environment for testing locally, it’s a heavy docker but it ships with a working Airflow and a lot of integrations.
  • Be patient and persistent. It might take some time to get a review or get the final approval from Committers.
  • Please follow ASF Code of Conduct for all communication including (but not limited to) comments on Pull Requests, Mailing list and Slack.
  • Be sure to read the Airflow Coding style.
    Apache Airflow is a community-driven project and together we are making it better 🚀.
    In case of doubts contact the developers at:
    Mailing List: [email protected]
    Slack: https://s.apache.org/airflow-slack

returning properly formatted meta-data (dictionary with ``extra-links`` and ``hook-class-names`` fields.
returning properly formatted meta-data (dictionary with ``extra-links`` and ``hook-class-names`` fields).

**What do I need to do to turn a package into a provider?**
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

❤️

@github-actions github-actions bot added the okay to merge It's ok to merge this PR as it does not require more tests label Dec 30, 2020
@github-actions
Copy link

The PR is likely ready to be merged. No tests are needed as no important environment files, nor python files were modified by it. However, committers might decide that full test matrix is needed and add the 'full tests needed' label. Then you should rebase it to the latest master or amend the last commit of the PR, and push it with --force-with-lease.

@potiuk potiuk merged commit b52d39f into apache:master Dec 30, 2020
@boring-cyborg
Copy link

boring-cyborg bot commented Dec 30, 2020

Awesome work, congrats on your first merged pull request!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind:documentation okay to merge It's ok to merge this PR as it does not require more tests
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants