+1 (binding)

śr., 27 paź 2021 o 22:45 Dennis Akpenyi <[email protected]>
napisał(a):

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 5:40 PM Jed Cunningham <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hey fellow Airflowers,
>>
>> I have cut Airflow 2.2.1rc2. This email is calling a vote on the release,
>> which will last for 72 hours, from Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 15:45 UTC
>> until Friday, October 29, 2021 at 15:45 UTC, or until 3 binding +1 votes
>> have been received.
>>
>>
>> https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=8&iso=20211029T1545&p1=1440
>>
>> Consider this my (non-binding) +1. As I’m not a member of the PMC, Kaxil
>> signed the distribution.
>>
>> Airflow 2.2.1rc2 is available at:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/airflow/2.2.1rc2/
>>
>> *apache-airflow-2.2.1-source.tar.gz* is a source release that comes with
>> INSTALL instructions.
>> *apache-airflow-2.2.1.tar.gz* is the binary Python "sdist" release.
>> *apache_airflow-2.2.1-py3-none-any.whl* is the binary Python wheel
>> "binary" release.
>>
>> Public keys are available at:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/airflow/KEYS
>>
>> Please vote accordingly:
>>
>> [ ] +1 approve
>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>> [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason
>>
>> Only votes from PMC members are binding, but all members of the community
>> are encouraged to test the release and vote with "(non-binding)".
>>
>> The test procedure for PMCs and Contributors who would like to test this
>> RC are described in
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/dev/README_RELEASE_AIRFLOW.md\#verify-the-release-candidate-by-pmcs
>>
>> Please note that the version number excludes the `rcX` string, so it's now
>> simply 2.2.1. This will allow us to rename the artifact without modifying
>> the artifact checksums when we actually release.
>>
>> Full Changelog:
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/2.2.1rc2/CHANGELOG.txt
>>
>> Changes since 2.2.1rc1:
>> *Bugs*:
>> - Fix Unexpected commit error in schedulerjob (#19213)
>> - Add DagRun.logical_date as a property (#19198)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jed
>>
>

Reply via email to