Folks, I have a question for you. We are working o...
# announcements
Folks, I have a question for you. We are working on revamping the flytekit configuration system. But, always try very hard not to break anyone. Would it be ok, if we changed flytekit.remote constructor and deprecate some configs. This may break some scripts that use flytekit.remote, but the fix will be very simple. cc @Maarten de Jong / @jeev / @Dylan Wilder
the goal is to make it extremely simple for anyone to instantiate flytekit.remote and even perform registration directly programmatically. We are moving towards a completely automated registration process to improve velocity, but we need to change a few things before that
🙏 1
also @Adrian Rumpold
also @Fabio Grätz / @Emirhan Karagül
personally we don't shy away from breaking a few things here and then if it improves the experience, so I'd be cool with it. If there's a issue on the suggested changes it'd be interesting to know as well
🙌 1
Same here, we will at first pin a version before that change and then adapt it. On Tuesday in the community sync I will talk about how we accelerated registration programatically using the flyte remote and a hydra-core launcher we built for flyte. With this you can build all images, register, and optionally execution with a single cmd.
👀 2
❤️ 2
This is amazing
So let's just build on that
no issue for us either.
❤️ 1