I still see the same reproducibility issue that should have been handled by pinning flit. I am not sure now why it did not work again, it might need a bit of investigation. But I manually compared the differences and the differences are only in metadata, so even if the reproducibility check does not pass, it's not a "hard" condition. Licences, checksum, signatures work. I do not want this to hold the 2.10.3 Airflow release. The amazon provider needs common.compat provider as well for some cases as noted by Pavan in https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/43615#issuecomment-2453500628 - it will need common.compat provider release as well for some, and since this one is not blocking, then I think we should make next rc.
So: +1 for FAB provider -1 for amazon provider. We should closely look and do the next release together with Elad to address the reproducibility issue, though. J. On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 12:46 PM Wei Lee <weilee...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 non-binding. Tested my changes > > Best, > Wei > > > On Nov 3, 2024, at 4:34 PM, Elad Kalif <elad...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > Correction vote will end on November 04, 2024 08:30 AM UTC and until 3 > > binding +1 votes have been received. > > > > On Sun, Nov 3, 2024 at 10:31 AM Elad Kalif <elad...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >> Hey all, > >> > >> I have just cut rc3 Airflow Providers packages. This email is calling a > >> vote on the release, > >> which will last for 24 hours - which means that it will end on November > >> 06, 2024 08:30 AM UTC and until 3 binding +1 votes have been received. > >> > >> Consider this my (binding) +1. > >> > >> Airflow Providers are available at: > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/airflow/providers/ > >> > >> *apache-airflow-providers-<PROVIDER>-*.tar.gz* are the binary > >> Python "sdist" release - they are also official "sources" for the > >> provider packages. > >> > >> *apache_airflow_providers_<PROVIDER>-*.whl are the binary > >> Python "wheel" release. > >> > >> The test procedure for PMC members is described in > >> > >> > https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/dev/README_RELEASE_PROVIDER_PACKAGES.md#verify-the-release-candidate-by-pmc-members > >> > >> The test procedure for and Contributors who would like to test this RC > is > >> described in: > >> > >> > https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/dev/README_RELEASE_PROVIDER_PACKAGES.md#verify-the-release-candidate-by-contributors > >> > >> > >> 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 members of the community > are > >> encouraged to test the release and vote with "(non-binding)". > >> > >> Please note that the version number excludes the 'rcX' string. > >> This will allow us to rename the artifact without modifying > >> the artifact checksums when we actually release. > >> > >> The status of testing the providers by the community is kept here: > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/43615 > >> > >> The issue is also the easiest way to see important PRs included in the > RC > >> candidates. > >> Detailed changelog for the providers will be published in the > >> documentation after the > >> RC candidates are released. > >> > >> You can find the RC packages in PyPI following these links: > >> > >> https://pypi.org/project/apache-airflow-providers-amazon/9.1.0rc3/ > >> https://pypi.org/project/apache-airflow-providers-fab/1.5.0rc3/ > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Elad Kalif > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@airflow.apache.org > >
