@Marvin Can I deploy a flow without specifying a deployment name, only the flow name? And what is the point of a deployment name if they don't actually group flows together in the ui properly?

So you want to know if you can ditch the deployment name when setting things up, and you're wondering why we even need this deployment name thing if it doesn't do what you'd expect in the UI. Are you using Prefect 2.x or Prefect 3.x? The specifics might differ between these versions.

@Marvin prefect 2.19.3

Alright, here's the deal based on Prefect 2.19.3 docs: 1. Deployment Name Requirement: - From the documentation, there is no explicit mention that you can deploy a flow completely without a deployment name. It seems like giving a deployment name is necessary for the command to function correctly. 2. Purpose of Deployment Name: - Deployment names help differentiate multiple deployments of the same flow, making management easier. - They can be reused in various contexts, such as defining schedules, work pool configurations, and more. 3. Grouping in the UI: - Despite the expectation, deployments do not necessarily group flows together neatly in the UI. The deployment name helps manage them, but this is more on the organization side rather than UI presentation. For more details, you can check out the deployment guide in the Prefect docs. So, unfortunately, you can't escape giving a deployment name, and they serve more of an organizational role, even if they don't group flows in the UI as you'd hope.

@Marvin scientists and researchers on the team struggle to see the point of specifying a deployment name when you can just make the flow name unique. Additionally not having them group in the ui defeats the purpose of organization to begin with. Coincidently, having a version parameter for deployments is also pointless if they don't do anything... Prefect doesn't even generate a DAG for flows and subflows...

Wow, you've got a lot of points there! 1. Deployment Names vs. Unique Flow Names: Your team’s wondering why deployment names are needed at all when making the flow name unique could suffice. It's true, on the surface, giving each flow a unique name could solve organizational headaches. But deployment names are more about the flexibility to have multiple deployable configurations for the same flow. 2. UI Grouping Issues: Yep, if the deployments aren’t grouping properly in the UI, it can feel like the deployment names are pointless. Relying on deployment names without UI backup can be frustrating. 3. Version Parameter: Ouch. It hurts when a feature exists but doesn’t actually do anything. That’s super annoying, especially if you're expecting it to manage different versions of your deployment accurately. 4. No DAG Generation: Prefect not generating DAGs (like Airflow does) can be another bummer, given it's easier to visualize and manage complex workflows with subflows this way. To wrap this up: 1. Prefect requires deployment names for the backend configuration, but it might be overkill for simple use cases. 2. The UI might not reflect the organizational layer you'd expect. 3. Version parameters sitting idle feels like a draft feature. Let’s look into issues and discussions related to these points on GitHub to see if there are ongoing fixes or workarounds. I'll check for relevant issues and updates from the Prefect GitHub repo to try and get some clarity or helpful solutions. Hang tight. Alright, let's break this down based on current info and GitHub issues: 1. Deployment Names & UI Grouping: - Prefect requires deployment names for organizational purposes. Complaints about how they are displayed in the UI are valid. - Issue: Add option to Archive or hide deployments implies efforts are being made to improve deployment visibility. - Improved Filtering: Improved search and filter in Prefect UI is another step towards better dashboard management. 2. Version Parameters: - The usability of version parameters is questioned. - Issue: Deployment versioning suggests a need for better version management and display in UI. 3. No DAG Generation for Flows/Subflows: - Prefect’s current handling of tasks included in lists complicates DAG visualization. - Issue: Phantom `List` task complicating the DAG underlines that Prefect does generate some elements for the DAG, although imperfectly. Based on all this, Prefect is likely working on improvements but hasn't solved all concerns yet. If the specifics are crucial for your workflow, these GitHub issues are the place to track progress or even contribute feedback for faster resolutions. For full context: - Add option to Archive or hide deployments - Improved search and filter in Prefect UI - Deployment versioning - Phantom `List` task complicating the DAG Hope this helps!

@Marvin thank you for linking me those issues, I will follow them but some of them are very old

Yeah, I get it. It can be frustrating when issues hang around for a while. Open-source projects like Prefect often rely on community feedback and contributions for prioritization. Tracking those issues is a good start. Also, consider: 1. Upvoting Relevant Issues: On GitHub, issues with more engagement often get more attention. 2. Commenting: Share your use case. Maintain a professional tone and explain why a fix is important. 3. Community Forums: Prefect's Discourse or Slack channels can be great for voicing concerns directly to developers and finding workarounds from other users. Hang in there! Hopefully, your feedback can help nudge these improvements along.