jscheffl opened a new issue, #61418: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/61418
### Apache Airflow version main (development) ### If "Other Airflow 3 version" selected, which one? _No response_ ### What happened? PR #61417 with upgrading Ruff version to 0.15.0 enabled rule ASYNC240 per default. Some occurrences and findings make the code not compatible. Nevertheless the rule seems to make sense in general not blocking async code by IO requests. ### What you think should happen instead? Rule should be re-enabled and code locations should be optimized. NOTE: It is to be decided which of the two libraries to use and it seems this is adding a new dependency. So a short cal to maintainers is needed to get a quorum which to pick. ### How to reproduce Remove exclusion of rule ASYNC240 as it was added by https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/61417/changes/e3c727cfbfaa23111e30dfc8fb679d50bac7e605 in `pyproject.toml`, run ruff in the repo to see cases where code needs to be fixed. Follow descriptions in https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/blocking-path-method-in-async-function/#blocking-path-method-in-async-function-async240 ### Operating System - ### Versions of Apache Airflow Providers _No response_ ### Deployment Other ### Deployment details _No response_ ### Anything else? _No response_ ### Are you willing to submit PR? - [ ] Yes I am willing to submit a PR! ### Code of Conduct - [x] I agree to follow this project's [Code of Conduct](https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md) -- 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]
