IMHO, if we would like to replace pendulum to alternatives, the better alternative would be combination of datetime.datetime + zoneinfo + datetime.timezone
We still do hacks around pendulum functional, which makes hacks around datetime.datetime, so in my perspective better remove redundant layers and use native objects directly. What confuses me the most is how we get around type changes in Tasks Context. All dates return as pendulum.DateTime for a very long time (literally for ages) and it is probably could be classified as breaking changes, because it might break quite a bit users pipelines. It still could be resolved as optional pendulum dependency + config option for datetime types in context, which might help to get familiar types for a while. On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 at 05:58, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > "infamous fork of " should be "fork of infamous Akka" - just to be clear :) > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 2:57 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > > > It's a very rare occurrence that ASF accepts forks. Usually it has to be > > willingly donated by those who own the IP rights, - mainly because of > > trademark issues. Licence is one thing, but carrying things like the name > > of the project is not possible without clearing IP and donating the > > project. > > > > It happened last time last year - with Pekko project - infamous fork or > > Akka after Lightbend changed licensing for Akka - > > https://www.lightbend.com/blog/why-we-are-changing-the-license-for-akka > > making it impossible to be used in ASF projects with the new licence. But > > it was a really "strong" case and the "we do not accept forks usually" > was > > quite a contentious issue (I followed the discussion - it was fascinating > > actually). It tool a LOT of time and effort for those who led the effort > > eventually - and also mostly because things had to be crystal-clear and > not > > "litigable" because the other side had some business reasons to make the > > licensing changes and they did not understood why it is impossible to use > > Akka as-is even with all the exclusions they offered to ASF - and > > effectively it was a "hostile" move. > > > > I don't think it's "worth" it in this case to be honest - especially if > > the maintainers are effectively "silent" and seem to ignore problems of > one > > of the really serious users they have. If they were willing to cooperate, > > we could do a lot, but when we are left alone, I think it will be far > more > > convenient for us to look for alternatives - to be honest. > > > > J. > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 2:46 AM Austin Bennett <aus...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > >> An option would be to fork Pendulum? It is MIT Licensed, I don't know > >> whether that poses problems to get in ASF? > >> > >> If forking (?) which is somewhat non-ideal, would we want that 'in' > >> airflow? > >> > >> If not 'in' airflow, I wonder if ASF incubator would accept a forked > >> project? [ anecdotally Linux Foundation has incubated Starrocks which > is > >> a > >> fork of Apache Doris, so there's precedence for this to be OK in the > wider > >> OSS ecosystem ]. > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 6:41 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > >> > >> > I have not heard back from maintainers, just a comment from someone > else > >> > who suggested donating a pendulum to the ASF (which is kinda > interesting > >> > idea). I followed up, let's see. I think if we do not hear back and > >> there > >> > will be another week or two where "Pendulum 3 supporting 3.12 support > >> "is > >> > coming" but no-one knows when, effectively means that we should look > >> for an > >> > alternative like NOW. > >> > > >> > J. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 3:27 AM Daniel Standish > >> > <daniel.stand...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote: > >> > > >> > > Thanks Jarek > >> > > > >> > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2023, 4:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > I think we miss important insight - straight from the source. > >> > > > > >> > > > I believe it's time to be candid and simply ask questions for the > >> > future > >> > > of > >> > > > Pendulum directly where we should - ie. we should just ask > >> > maintainers. > >> > > > > >> > > > I've just started a very candid and open discussion there - > >> > > > https://github.com/sdispater/pendulum/discussions/771 . > >> > > > > >> > > > I linked back to this discussion and explained where we are coming > >> > from. > >> > > I > >> > > > even offered an option, that maybe - if they accept some help and > >> would > >> > > be > >> > > > open to make a few of us maintainers of Pendulum, that I will ask > if > >> > some > >> > > > of the maintainers here in Airflow would like to step up (I would > be > >> > > > willing to - for one) and help to at least move Pendulum through > >> 3.12 > >> > and > >> > > > maybe keep it running for as long as it will be needed to maintain > >> it. > >> > > > > >> > > > I think if they would be open to some of us helping them - this > >> might > >> > be > >> > > > actually the "cheapest" option for us to be honest at least in a > >> > mid-term > >> > > > if we could gain influence and even take part and speed up > releases > >> and > >> > > > merging of issues that are blocking us (or would be blocking us in > >> the > >> > > > future). > >> > > > > >> > > > I tried to be very friendly but candid and direct on what kind of > >> > > problems > >> > > > it creates us and also expressed our thanks for supporting us for > so > >> > long > >> > > > (I do believe they deserve it). I think the sole (pretty much) > >> > > maintainer > >> > > > of Pendulum might really have a hard time maintaining and keeping > >> it up > >> > > for > >> > > > years - without being paid for and thanked. I hope - maybe all > that > >> > they > >> > > > need are a few words of encouragement and thanks and realising > that > >> > > others > >> > > > depend on their work - but also seeing that they are understood, > >> > > empathised > >> > > > with and that there are viable alternatives they might follow > might > >> be > >> > > > helpful for them to be also candid and respond. I hope my > intentions > >> > will > >> > > > be understood - that I am not complaining, but even trying to > help. > >> > > > > >> > > > Let\s see where it gets us. > >> > > > > >> > > > J. > >> > > > > >> > > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 5:32 PM Andrey Anshin < > >> > andrey.ans...@taragol.is> > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > Just to clarify I'd like us to consider the possibility that no > >> new > >> > > > > pendulum would be released or released at the end of 2024, like > a > >> > > > > pessimistic scenario: > >> > > > > - What should we do in this case? > >> > > > > - Work out a backup plan. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > ---- > >> > > > > Best Wishes > >> > > > > *Andrey Anshin* > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 at 16:33, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> > >> wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Also I think TP - had a document in the past (years ago) > >> > > describing a > >> > > > > > draft of a more complete alternative we can take to approach > >> > datetime > >> > > > vs. > >> > > > > > pendulum dichotomy. I cannot easily find the document and > >> > discussion > >> > > - > >> > > > > but > >> > > > > > I do remember it was proposing some interesting changes in the > >> > > approach > >> > > > > of > >> > > > > > Airflow to have an abstraction layer on top of it (as far as I > >> > > > remember). > >> > > > > > Maybe we can resurrect that idea if TP might find the > proposal ? > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 1:06 PM Bolke de Bruin < > >> bdbr...@gmail.com> > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hi, > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I agree that the current speed of development of Pendulum > >> leaves > >> > > > > > something > >> > > > > > > to be desired. However, I think we should not underestimate > >> the > >> > > > effort > >> > > > > of > >> > > > > > > replacing it. It is not just a matter of > >> %s/pendulum/datetime/g > >> > so > >> > > to > >> > > > > > say. > >> > > > > > > If we are *truly* thinking about moving to native datetime / > >> > > zoneinfo > >> > > > > etc > >> > > > > > > we need *extensive* tests, basically copying what pendulum > >> does > >> > to > >> > > > > check > >> > > > > > > its behavior. The reason is that native implementations in > the > >> > past > >> > > > > made > >> > > > > > > serious mistakes and I do not put a lot of trust in them. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > An abstraction or vendoring in could be alternatives, but > they > >> > > bring > >> > > > > > their > >> > > > > > > own significant challenges. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I have re-raised the issue here: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > https://github.com/sdispater/pendulum/issues/753 > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > The upside is that it seems the amount of issues with the > >> beta is > >> > > > > > limited, > >> > > > > > > so hopefully the maintainers can spend a couple of cycles to > >> > > address > >> > > > > > them. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Bolke > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 at 10:28, Andrey Anshin < > >> > > > andrey.ans...@taragol.is> > >> > > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > There is no changes in stable pendulum so let's try to > >> continue > >> > > > this > >> > > > > > > > discussion and start think about "Plan B" > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Just a reminder: > >> > > > > > > > - pendulum 2.1.2 released 3 years ago (at the time Airflow > >> > > 1.10.x) > >> > > > > > > > - pendulum 2 doesn't work well in Python 3.12, this is a > >> > > > showstopper > >> > > > > > for > >> > > > > > > > the support Python 3.12 > >> > > > > > > > - pendulum 2 have memory leaks ( > >> > > > > > > > https://github.com/sdispater/pendulum/issues/720), and > >> Airflow > >> > > use > >> > > > > > > > approach > >> > > > > > > > to achieve this leaks, especially in K8S executor > >> > > > > > > > - pendulum 2 doesn't use system tzdata by default, but we > >> have > >> > a > >> > > > > > > > workaround, thanks Bolke for the documentation > >> > > > > > > > - pendulum it is a core dependency of Airflow, and I guess > >> we > >> > > can't > >> > > > > > > > remove/replace it without breaking changes. > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > So my proposal if things won't change in the near future > >> then > >> > we > >> > > > need > >> > > > > > to > >> > > > > > > > start removing the pendulum from the core and replace it > >> with > >> > the > >> > > > > > native > >> > > > > > > > datetime / zoneinfo / tzinfo. But maybe we have another > way > >> to > >> > > > > resolve > >> > > > > > > this > >> > > > > > > > without breaking changes? Because for me it would be a > >> little > >> > > weird > >> > > > > if > >> > > > > > > > removal pendulum would be a main driver for release > Airflow > >> 3 > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > ---- > >> > > > > > > > Best Wishes > >> > > > > > > > *Andrey Anshin* > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Thu, 28 Sept 2023 at 13:01, Andrey Anshin < > >> > > > > andrey.ans...@taragol.is > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > This discussion is more about the known problem of > >> pendulum > >> > and > >> > > > how > >> > > > > > we > >> > > > > > > > > could deal with it and maybe how we (as Community) might > >> help > >> > > > > autor. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > The library is mostly supported by a single author > >> Sébastien > >> > > > > Eustace > >> > > > > > ( > >> > > > > > > > > https://github.com/sdispater) and it seems like we bump > >> into > >> > > the > >> > > > > > > > > situation which is described in xkcd #2347 ( > >> > > > > > > > > https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/dependency.png). To be > >> honest > >> > it > >> > > is > >> > > > > not > >> > > > > > > > > something new when library mainly supported by one > author > >> so > >> > > > there > >> > > > > is > >> > > > > > > > > always a risk that the library will no longer be > >> supported / > >> > > > > > abandoned > >> > > > > > > > > And if takes in account that pendulum provides core > >> > > functionality > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > > > > > Airflow it could have dramatical impact in the future. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Pendulum is a really nice library which helps a lot of > >> > > developers > >> > > > > to > >> > > > > > > work > >> > > > > > > > > with dates/datetimes. However there is one major > problem, > >> the > >> > > > last > >> > > > > > > > release > >> > > > > > > > > of this library happened more than 3 years ago ( > >> > > > > > > > > https://pypi.org/project/pendulum/#history) in the time > >> when > >> > > > > Airflow > >> > > > > > > > > 1.10.11 was released > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Fortunately, the project is not abandoned and on a > regular > >> > > basis > >> > > > > > > commits > >> > > > > > > > > add into the master branch. However these commits are > not > >> > > > included > >> > > > > > into > >> > > > > > > > any > >> > > > > > > > > final release and that's why some things related to > >> datetime > >> > > > don't > >> > > > > > work > >> > > > > > > > as > >> > > > > > > > > expected in Airflow. There are list of known (for me) > >> issues > >> > > > which > >> > > > > > are > >> > > > > > > > > affect Airflow > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > *Memory Leak on parse*: > >> > > > > > > > > - https://github.com/sdispater/pendulum/issues/720, > this > >> one > >> > > > fixed > >> > > > > > 2 > >> > > > > > > > > years ago but not available yet ( > >> > > > > > > > > https://github.com/sdispater/pendulum/pull/563). Since > we > >> > use > >> > > > > parse > >> > > > > > > > dates > >> > > > > > > > > in airflow codebase: datetime parameters and datetime in > >> logs > >> > > > this > >> > > > > > one > >> > > > > > > > > could be a reason for memory leakage in Airflow: > >> > > > > > > > > - https://github.com/apache/airflow/discussions/24694 > >> > > > > > > > > - https://github.com/apache/airflow/discussions/28597 > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > *Incorrect time zones*, known issues and should be > already > >> > > fixed > >> > > > in > >> > > > > > > > > master branch > >> > > > > > > > > - https://github.com/sdispater/pendulum/issues/700, > >> Mexico > >> > do > >> > > > not > >> > > > > > use > >> > > > > > > > DST > >> > > > > > > > > anymore > >> > > > > > > > > - https://github.com/sdispater/pendulum/issues/706, > Egypt > >> > > > > reinstate > >> > > > > > > DST > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > We add clarification in > >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/30467 > >> > > > > > , > >> > > > > > > > > however it seems like there is no other way rather than > >> > > patching > >> > > > > > > Pendulum > >> > > > > > > > > right now. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > All these issues should be solved as soon as pendulum 3 > is > >> > > > > released. > >> > > > > > > The > >> > > > > > > > > current announced estimation is end of september/ > >> beginning > >> > of > >> > > > > > October: > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > https://github.com/sdispater/pendulum/issues/600#issuecomment-1711299677 > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > So in theory we would have a fixed version of pendulum > >> soon, > >> > > and > >> > > > it > >> > > > > > > might > >> > > > > > > > > break something in Airflow but from my point of view it > is > >> > > better > >> > > > > > than > >> > > > > > > > > current status. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > However there might be a situation where the release of > >> the > >> > > > > pendulum > >> > > > > > > > would > >> > > > > > > > > be postponed, so maybe better to have a backup plan. > What > >> > could > >> > > > we > >> > > > > do > >> > > > > > > in > >> > > > > > > > > this case? > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Maybe we should start to use zoneinfo.ZoneInfo instead > of > >> > > > pendulum > >> > > > > > > > > datetime? > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/19450 > >> > > > > > > > > Pros: > >> > > > > > > > > - stdlib (python 3.9+) > >> > > > > > > > > - In pendulum 3.0 Timezone based on zoneinfo.Zoneinfo > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Cons: > >> > > > > > > > > - Current serialization model can't deal with backport > >> > > packages. > >> > > > > E.g. > >> > > > > > > > > timezone which are serialized in backport_zoneinfo can't > >> be > >> > > > > > > deserialized > >> > > > > > > > in > >> > > > > > > > > zoneinfo > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Maybe we should replace parse datetime with another > >> solution. > >> > > > Does > >> > > > > > > anyone > >> > > > > > > > > know a good replacement? > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Maybe someone from Airflow Community could propose their > >> help > >> > > > with > >> > > > > > > > > maintenance of library: > >> > > > > > > > > - https://github.com/sdispater/pendulum/issues/590 > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Maybe we should get rid of the pendulum at all, as a > last > >> > > resort > >> > > > > > > > solution. > >> > > > > > > > > I can't imagine how we could do that, because a lot of > >> stuff > >> > > > > depends > >> > > > > > on > >> > > > > > > > the > >> > > > > > > > > pendulum and removing it would be a breaking change. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > ---- > >> > > > > > > > > Best Wishes > >> > > > > > > > > *Andrey Anshin* > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- > >> > > > > > > Bolke de Bruin > >> > > > > > > bdbr...@gmail.com > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >
