So far we've been talking about Airflow core bugs, but we do have 2 other issue templates that ask for the Airflow version - chart and providers.
Both of those ultimately do support non-latest core versions, so I don't think we can be quite as blunt there. We either keep the full list or convert to a free text field. I don't have a strong preference here. Anyone have any thoughts? On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 5:44 PM Jeambrun Pierre <pierrejb...@gmail.com> wrote: > Same, great idea :) > > On Fri 5 Aug 2022 at 01:43, Vikram Koka <vik...@astronomer.io.invalid> > wrote: > >> +1 on this approach with this approach in the PR >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/25542 >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 12:40 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: >> >>> Love it. >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 9:28 PM Jed Cunningham <jedcunning...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Sorry, coming to this a little late. I tend to agree with Elad that we >>>> might be better off not even having 2.0/2.1, and I'll go further that we >>>> should consider only listing main/latest/possibly n-1(e.g. 2.3.2). >>>> >>>> I'm also concerned only showing the latest in every minor may imply >>>> those are all getting bugfixes, while in fact only 2.3.x is. Plus, even if >>>> we tell people to upgrade to the latest 2.2.x version (2.2.5 from 2.2.2, >>>> for example) before reporting, the first thing we are going to ask in the >>>> issue is "what about 2.3.3/main?". >>>> >>>> Another option is a free test field instead, though this doesn't >>>> provide the subtle hint you are after. >>>> >>>> If we don't make it a free text field and don't enumerate all the >>>> versions, we almost certainly want an "other" option? I'd rather give them >>>> that escape hatch then have the wrong version in the easy to spot section >>>> and their real version hidden in a wall of text. >>>> >>>> I've opened this to take your change a bit further: >>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/25542 >>>> >>>
