Hello I'm curious what approach others are taking with regards where to place flows in package hierarchy. I've seen here that the suggestion is to put them at the top of the hierarchy. This issue is pretty old though (2.5 years) so I wonder if it is still the main suggested approach? Also saw this open PR, which I found interesting. Do you think something like this could be an option moving forward?

Solution we stumbled upon was something like

my_src/
- cool_stuff.py
flows/
- my_src/ (symlink)
- my_flow.py
- other_flow.py

This way you have flows and source code cleanly organized in folders, but metaflow can still package your src code when running remote tasks

Hey, Thanks for the response.

Also would be nice to be able to tell metaflow to NOT package the code explicitly. For example we were thinking our production runs would have the code packaged and versioned via docker, and we only need to package the src during development

This indeed would be good. 🙂 Is there an open issue for it?

I'm not aware of one, I think we were going to manually remove the symlink in our CI pipeline but seems hacky 😄

It is not possible to do it through the dockerignore file?

Well we want the code in the docker image but NOT in the S3 tarball that metaflow creates when you run

python flow.py argo-workflows create

for example

Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought you were talking about removing the symlink when building the docker image.