> All good Jarek, let's see how much we get through tomorrow :)
Just a bit of a teaser:
| [ERROR] AI-Generated Code Signal: Description doesn't match code:
The PR description claims '22 test cases' were created covering 'Basic
nested class imports (2-5 levels deep), Edge │
│ cases, Error handling, Real-world scenarios', but the actual test
diff adds only 7 lines — one helper class (_OuterClass with
_InnerClass) and a single additional assertion in the │
│ existing test_import_string method. The claimed comprehensive
22-test suite does not exist in the diff. This is a strong indicator
of a fabricated or AI-hallucinated description that │
│ does not reflect the actual changes submitted.
│
│ [WARNING] Gen-AI disclosure: The Gen-AI disclosure checkbox is
explicitly unchecked (`- [ ] Yes`), yet the PR exhibits multiple
strong AI-generation signals: highly structured formatting │
│ with emojis (❌ ✅), precise but fabricated test count claims (22/22
passed, 100%), narrating-style comments in the code (e.g., '#
Backtrack: assume the last component is a class, not a │
│ module', '# No more dots to split, this is a genuine import error'),
and a description that materially overstates the scope of changes. If
AI tooling was used, the disclosure checkbox │
│ must be checked per the project's contributing guidelines.
Or:
| @xxxxxxx This PR has been converted to **draft** because it does not
yet meet our [Pull Request quality
│
│
criteria](https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/contributing-docs/05_pull_requests.rst#pull-request-quality-criteria).
│
│
│
│ **Issues found:**
│
│ - ❌ **Other failing CI checks**: Failing: Build info. Run `prek run
--from-ref main` locally to reproduce. See
│
│
(https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/contributing-docs/08_static_code_checks.rst).
│
│
│
│ > **Note:** Your branch is **648 commits behind `main`**. Some check
failures may be caused by changes in the base branch rather than by
your PR. Please rebase your branch and push again │
│ to get up-to-date CI results.
│
│
│
│ **What to do next:**
│
│ - The comment informs you what you need to do.
│
│ - Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the
GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
│
│ - Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.
│
│
│
│ Converting a PR to draft is **not** a rejection — it is an
invitation to bring the PR up to the project's standards so that
maintainer review time is spent productively. If you have │
│ questions, feel free to ask on the [Airflow
Slack](https://s.apache.org/airflow-slack).
│
╰────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
J.
On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 6:03 PM Vikram Koka via dev <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Thanks for flagging that Amogh, fixed now
>
> All good Jarek, let's see how much we get through tomorrow :)
>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 9:38 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I added the Auto-triage topic to the agenda - without aksing sorry - but
> I
> > think it is super important to demo it. By tomorrow, the tool will be
> ready
> > for everyone to use, and I already see how it will help us solve our PR
> AI
> > slop problem.
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 5:14 PM Amogh Desai <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Vikram,
> > >
> > > Small correction, the content under multi team and deadline alerts
> seems
> > to
> > > have been swapped.
> > >
> > > Apart from that, everything looks good.
> > >
> > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > Amogh Desai
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 5:49 AM Vikram Koka via dev <
> > > [email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hey everyone,
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for attending the dev call on the 26th of February. I
> updated
> > > > our meeting notes on the Airflow wiki and the link for those notes is
> > > here
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=373886699#Airflow3.xDevCall:Meetingnotes-Summary.32
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > To everyone who attended the meeting, please check the summary and
> add
> > > > anything I may have missed. For those who could not join, please let
> us
> > > > know if you disagree with anything discussed and agreed upon in
> > > > the meeting. Also, please do ask questions if something is unclear.
> > > >
> > > > Our next meeting is scheduled for the 12th of March at the same time.
> > > > Please note that due to the US daylight saving time change, this time
> > may
> > > > be off by an hour for your time zone. It is scheduled for 9 a.m.
> > Pacific
> > > > Time on 12th of March.
> > > >
> > > > The agenda is already populated, primarily with Airflow 3.2 AIP
> > updates.
> > > If
> > > > you would like to keep this call to discuss a particular topic,
> please
> > > let
> > > > me know if you would like to add anything to the agenda
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=373886699#Airflow3.xDevCall:Meetingnotes-12March2026
> > > > >
> > > > .
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Vikram
> > > > --
> > > > Below is the summary from the last call:
> > > >
> > > > - Swim lane updates:
> > > > - UI Test framework (Rahul Vats):
> > > > - Rahul shared that the UI test framework has reached a
> > > > significant milestone, now at 121 test cases after removing
> > > > pagination and
> > > > sorting cases from the meta issue, which has now been closed
> > > with
> > > > all
> > > > scenarios marked as complete.
> > > > - Current work is focused on addressing test flakiness and
> > > > reducing execution time by increasing the number of workers
> > from
> > > > the
> > > > current default.
> > > > - Rahul plans to create a new meta issue next week for
> > > > contributions to unit tests as a follow-up to this work.
> > > > - On the performance front, Rahul and Pierre have created a
> > meta
> > > > issue for large DAG and task performance improvements, with
> 5
> > > > issues
> > > > already closed and around 4 still open. The target is to
> close
> > > the
> > > > remaining items before the 3.2 release.
> > > > - AIP-72 Task SDK update (Amogh)
> > > > - Amogh shared that the AIP-72 project board in Github is
> > > > officially closed today, having completed over 300 issues
> and
> > > > PRs, which
> > > > was significantly larger in scope than initially
> anticipated.
> > > > Phase 2
> > > > planning for expanding to DAG processing and Triggerer are
> > > > underway with
> > > > initial thinking of focusing on the 3.3 timeframe.
> > > > - Analysis of the remaining imports shows minimal
> > dependencies,
> > > > with the main blocker being that Dag.test still requires
> > > > Airflow Core, and
> > > > some dependencies based on the Deadline Alerts executor
> work.
> > > > - UI / API swim lane update (Pierre / Brent)
> > > > - Brent shared that UI plugins dependency work has been
> > > completed
> > > > and that the Data Partitions UI work is in progress for 3.2.
> > > > - Graph view performance optimization for large Dags is in
> > > flight
> > > > and is a stretch goal for the 3.2 release.
> > > > - Airflow 3.2 development updates:
> > > > - AIP-76 Asset Partitions (Wei Lee / TP):
> > > > - Wei shared a recorded video of the Asset Partitions work
> > which
> > > > demonstrated completed work for Date based partitioned DAGs.
> > > > - The outstanding element of work seemed to be
> documentation.
> > > > - Multi-team (Niko / Vincent):
> > > > - Dennis noted that a PR has been pending review for almost
> a
> > > > month. Amogh provided detailed feedback requiring
> significant
> > > > changes, and
> > > > while Jens had approved the PR, additional reviews were
> still
> > > > needed. The
> > > > team agreed that Dennis could proceed with follow-up PRs for
> > > > incremental
> > > > improvements in parallel.
> > > > - Deadline Alerts (Dennis Ferruzzi):
> > > > - Niko shared that the multi-team work had entered UAT phase
> with
> > > > ongoing, active community testing. All features scoped for
> 3.2
> > > > were
> > > > implemented and marked as "experimental" as previously
> > > discussed.
> > > > With
> > > > respect to executor support, Niko shared that Celery was
> > > > completed,
> > > > Kubernetes was in progress, and Edge discussions were
> ongoing.
> > > > - Niko also clarified that multi-team configuration required
> > > > deployment manager involvement and was not intended to be
> > > > dynamically
> > > > configurable.
> > > > - Release Management (Rahul / Kaxil):
> > > > - Rahul shared that the 3.2 timeline was on track, with the
> > beta
> > > > branch having been cut.
> > > > - Vikram shared that approximately 1,500 meaningful commits
> > were
> > > > included between 3.1 and 3.2, excluding CI and dev tooling,
> > > > which made this
> > > > significantly larger than a normal, minor release.
> > > > - Discussion topics:
> > > > - Helm chart release (Bugra)
> > > > - Bugra presented the current state of the Helm chart, with
> > > > version 1.19 recently released and proposed moving to a
> major
> > > > version i.e.
> > > > 2.0 to drop deprecated features.
> > > > - Jed recommended at least one more 1.x release with proper
> > > > deprecation warnings in place before making such a break.
> > > > Jens supported a
> > > > 1.20 release followed by a 2.0 clean up.
> > > > - The decision was to have the core Helm chart contributors
> > > > schedule a dedicated call to align on the release strategy.
> > > > Bugra took this
> > > > action item.
> > > > - Security / Isolation level for 3.2 (Jarek)
> > > > - Jarek raised the current gap in security isolation,
> > > specifically
> > > > that there is no isolation between tasks running on the same
> > > > machine.
> > > > - Ash said that he had a PR implementing a feature for
> worker
> > > > process memory protection, with additional work needed for
> > > > DAG processor
> > > > and triggerer isolation.
> > > > - After significant discussion, the team decided to defer
> the
> > > > follow-on work to 3.3 given the complexity and the required
> > > > integration
> > > > with the DAG processor and Triggerer changes already
> targeted
> > > for
> > > > that
> > > > release.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Vikram Koka
> > > > Chief Strategy Officer
> > > > Email: [email protected]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > <https://www.astronomer.io/>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
