Sorry for joining late! Thanks Shri! I have checked the applied simplification and the new changes that consolidate the templates. They look good and align with the proposed approach in the Confluence. Great work! Looking forward to seeing Airflow CTL :)
Kind regards, Bugra Ozturk On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 8:47 PM Shrividya Hegde <[email protected]> wrote: > The conflicts have been resolved and the PR( > https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/64240) is now ready for review. > I'm working on the Airflow CTL templates which we currently do not have in > place. That would be worked on as a separate PR. > > Thanks and regards, > Shrividya Hegde > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 1:11 AM Rahul Vats <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Thanks, Shri. Great work! I noticed some conflicts in > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/64240. Could you please resolve > > them > > and mark the PR as ready for review? > > > > Regards, > > Rahul Vats > > > > > > > > On Thu, 26 Mar 2026 at 10:36, Shrividya Hegde < > [email protected] > > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Everyone, > > > > > > Thank you all for your valuable insights throughout this thread. > > > > > > I have two updates to share: > > > > > > 1. The PR for bug report simplification ( > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/63851) has been successfully > > > merged. > > > 2. I have drafted a follow-up PR ( > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/64240) incorporating a few > > changes > > > proposed by Shahar in this thread, with some slight modifications to > the > > > approach. > > > > > > The proposed changes include: > > > • Consolidation of multiple issue types under a single issue template > > with > > > defined categories and values (as per applicability) > > > • Removal of redundant fields across the multiple templates > > > • Removal of the doc issue template > > > • File name updates across pre-commit YAMLs and > > > `prek/check_airflow_bug_report_template.py` > > > > > > I welcome any feedback and am open to making modifications based on the > > > discussion here. Please feel free to leave comments directly on the PR > or > > > share your thoughts in this thread. > > > > > > Thanks and Regards, > > > Shrividya Hegde > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 3:45 PM Shrividya Hegde < > > > [email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hey Jarek, > > > > > > > > I feel this is a perfect middle ground. The placeholder text , *"Run > > > > `airflow version` and paste the output here"* does all the heavy > > lifting > > > > of guiding the reporters to the exact command they need without too > > much > > > > hand holding while it keeps just enough friction (they have to go run > > it > > > > themselves) while removing the ambiguity of finding the right > version . > > > > Clean field, zero clutter, and we get the real version string from > > their > > > > actual environment rather than a dropdown guess. > > > > > > > > Happy to implement this if the rest of the community is aligned! > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Shrividya Hegde > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 2:24 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > >> > but GitHub issue form YAML is static and doesn't support > conditional > > > >> field visibility natively. > > > >> > > > >> Ha.. So it hasn't changed :) . I remember also wanting it badly :) > > > >> > > > >> > I also explored dynamically generating version options as a > > dropdown, > > > >> but > > > >> that felt like it would add more complexity than it removes, which > > works > > > >> against this PR's simplification goal. > > > >> > > > >> Actually that might be a good idea with a pre-K hook; however, we > > still > > > >> want some friction. One way I saw other projects handle similar > > > situations > > > >> was to add a small amount of friction while still being helpful: ask > > the > > > >> user to generate the version. For example in the hint for the other > > > field > > > >> (the gray text displayed until you click it) we can state something > > > like: > > > >> "Run `airflow version` and copy & paste the output."". On one hand, > it > > > >> creates some friction (because you need to switch context and, > instead > > > of > > > >> selecting a version in the form you need to figure out how to run > > > >> Airflow). > > > >> On the other hand, it's helpful suggestion that tells you exactly > how > > > you > > > >> find out the version. > > > >> > > > >> J. > > > >> > > > >> On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 1:28 AM Shrividya Hegde < > > > >> [email protected]> > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > Hi all, > > > >> > > > > >> > I've retained the Airflow version field in the PR as-is for now. > > > >> Ideally, > > > >> > we'd conditionally hide the "other versions" input once a main > > version > > > >> is > > > >> > selected , but GitHub issue form YAML is static and doesn't > support > > > >> > conditional field visibility natively. I also explored dynamically > > > >> > generating version options as a dropdown, but that felt like it > > would > > > >> add > > > >> > more complexity than it removes, which works against the > > > simplification > > > >> > goal of this PR. > > > >> > > > > >> > I plan to revisit this properly while working on unifying the core > > and > > > >> > providers bug report templates , as that feels like the right > scope > > to > > > >> > address it holistically. In the meantime, I'd welcome any ideas > from > > > the > > > >> > community on handling this elegantly within GitHub's YAML > > constraints. > > > >> > > > > >> > Thanks, > > > >> > Shrividya Hegde > > > >> > > > > >> > On Sun, Mar 22, 2026 at 11:44 AM Shrividya Hegde < > > > >> > [email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > Hey Potiuk, > > > >> > > > > > >> > > I'm working on it and will commit the changes soon. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Thanks, > > > >> > > Shrividya Hegde > > > >> > > > > > >> > > On Sun, 22 Mar, 2026, 11:08 am Jarek Potiuk, <[email protected]> > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >> > >> > Rahul's conditional field idea makes sense to me: keep the > > > dropdown > > > >> > with > > > >> > >> its nudge toward testing on latest, but only show the exact > > version > > > >> text > > > >> > >> field when "Other" is selected. That reduces visual noise > without > > > >> > changing > > > >> > >> the intent. > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> Not sure if that is possible. > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> On Sun, Mar 22, 2026 at 3:34 PM Shrividya Hegde < > > > >> > >> [email protected]> > > > >> > >> wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > Thanks for the context on the deliberate friction, that's a > > fair > > > >> point > > > >> > >> and > > > >> > >> > I hadn't fully considered it. > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > Rahul's conditional field idea makes sense to me: keep the > > > dropdown > > > >> > with > > > >> > >> > its nudge toward testing on latest, but only show the exact > > > version > > > >> > text > > > >> > >> > field when "Other" is selected. That reduces visual noise > > without > > > >> > >> changing > > > >> > >> > the intent. > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > Happy to update the PR along those lines if it works for > > > everyone. > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > Thanks, > > > >> > >> > Shrividya Hegde > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > On Sun, 22 Mar, 2026, 5:05 am Jarek Potiuk, < > [email protected]> > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > Hey Shrividya, > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > Agree with Rahul here. We deliberately introduced friction > - > > > and > > > >> > make > > > >> > >> it > > > >> > >> > a > > > >> > >> > > bit "harder" to report issues for older versions - we even > > > >> > >> specifically > > > >> > >> > > "hint" people to check it on the latest version: > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > On what 3.X version of Airflow are you currently > > experiencing > > > >> the > > > >> > >> > issue? > > > >> > >> > > Remember, you are encouraged to > > > >> > >> > > > test with the latest release or on the `main` branch to > > > verify > > > >> > your > > > >> > >> > issue > > > >> > >> > > still exists, especially if > > > >> > >> > > > your version is at least a minor version older than the > > > >> [current > > > >> > >> stable > > > >> > >> > > release]( > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow/stable/installation/supported-versions.html#version-life-cycle > > > >> > >> > > ). > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > And yes - your goal when designing such an interaction > might > > > not > > > >> be > > > >> > >> "to > > > >> > >> > > make it easier for the user." In this case our optimisation > > > goal > > > >> is > > > >> > to > > > >> > >> > make > > > >> > >> > > things deliberately harder, when you want user to at least > be > > > >> aware > > > >> > >> that > > > >> > >> > > there is potentially another path they could make - upgrade > > or > > > >> check > > > >> > >> the > > > >> > >> > > issue. > > > >> > >> > > That design was deliberately built into the template form > > and I > > > >> > think > > > >> > >> it > > > >> > >> > > should stay. > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > You might of course propose another solution for it - but > > make > > > >> sure > > > >> > to > > > >> > >> > > target the goal > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > J. > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > On Sun, Mar 22, 2026 at 9:32 AM Rahul Vats < > > > >> [email protected]> > > > >> > >> > wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > Thanks Shrividya! > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > On version awareness, most users are data engineers and > in > > my > > > >> > >> > experience, > > > >> > >> > > > triaging issues, they generally know the version against > > > which > > > >> bug > > > >> > >> is > > > >> > >> > > being > > > >> > >> > > > raised. I have not really come across cases where someone > > > >> picked > > > >> > the > > > >> > >> > > wrong > > > >> > >> > > > version because they were unsure. > > > >> > >> > > > On the "Other Airflow 3 version" option, I think the > intent > > > >> was to > > > >> > >> keep > > > >> > >> > > the > > > >> > >> > > > dropdown from growing too long as new patch versions are > > > >> released, > > > >> > >> > rather > > > >> > >> > > > than a sign that the dropdown is not solving the > problem. A > > > >> > curated > > > >> > >> > list > > > >> > >> > > > actually makes it easier for reporters to pick the right > > > value > > > >> > >> quickly. > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > I think the other changes in this PR are solid. Merging > > "What > > > >> > >> happened" > > > >> > >> > > and > > > >> > >> > > > "How to reproduce" makes a lot of sense, and making OS > and > > > >> > >> deployment > > > >> > >> > > > optional is a good call. My concern is specifically > around > > > the > > > >> > free > > > >> > >> > form > > > >> > >> > > > text field, but happy to listen to other opinions as well > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > Thanks, > > > >> > >> > > > Rahul > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > On Sun, 22 Mar 2026 at 12:10, Shrividya Hegde < > > > >> > >> > > [email protected] > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > Thanks for the response, Rahul! > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > I get the reasoning behind the two-field setup, but I > > think > > > >> the > > > >> > >> > version > > > >> > >> > > > > confusion problem exists with a dropdown too. A > reporter > > > who > > > >> > >> doesn't > > > >> > >> > > know > > > >> > >> > > > > their exact version might just pick "3.x latest" even > if > > > >> they're > > > >> > >> on > > > >> > >> > an > > > >> > >> > > > > older release. The issue is that they don't know their > > > >> version, > > > >> > >> not > > > >> > >> > how > > > >> > >> > > > > they're entering it. > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > Also, having "Other Airflow 3 version" as an option in > > the > > > >> > >> dropdown > > > >> > >> > is > > > >> > >> > > a > > > >> > >> > > > > bit of a hint that the dropdown isn't really solving > the > > > >> problem > > > >> > >> on > > > >> > >> > its > > > >> > >> > > > > own. > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > A simple text field with a placeholder like `e.g. > 3.1.8` > > > does > > > >> > the > > > >> > >> > same > > > >> > >> > > > job > > > >> > >> > > > > with one less field, which is kind of the whole point > of > > > this > > > >> > PR. > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > That said, if the group prefers keeping some structure, > > the > > > >> > >> > conditional > > > >> > >> > > > > field idea you mentioned is a good middle ground. > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > +1 on unifying the core and providers templates too! > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > On Sun, 22 Mar, 2026, 2:24 am Rahul Vats, < > > > >> > [email protected] > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Thanks for raising this, Shrividya. I am totally in > > favor > > > >> of > > > >> > >> > > > simplifying > > > >> > >> > > > > > templates. > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > One thing I wanted to clarify on the current > two-field > > > >> setup: > > > >> > >> the > > > >> > >> > > > > dropdown > > > >> > >> > > > > > covers the common versions (2.x, 3.x latest, main), > and > > > the > > > >> > >> > secondary > > > >> > >> > > > > text > > > >> > >> > > > > > field is there for users who pick "Other Airflow 3 > > > >> version" so > > > >> > >> they > > > >> > >> > > are > > > >> > >> > > > > not > > > >> > >> > > > > > really redundant, they serve different purposes. > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > My hesitation with a fully free-text field is the > > version > > > >> > >> format. > > > >> > >> > > > 3.1.8, > > > >> > >> > > > > > v3.1.8, airflow 3.1.8, 3.1 are all valid ways someone > > > might > > > >> > type > > > >> > >> > the > > > >> > >> > > > same > > > >> > >> > > > > > version. The placeholder added in the PR helps, but > it > > > does > > > >> > not > > > >> > >> > > > enforce a > > > >> > >> > > > > > format. One thing worth exploring: can the "If Other > > > >> Airflow 3 > > > >> > >> > > version > > > >> > >> > > > > > selected, which one?" field be shown conditionally > only > > > >> when > > > >> > >> "Other > > > >> > >> > > > > Airflow > > > >> > >> > > > > > 3 version" is selected in the dropdown? That would > > reduce > > > >> the > > > >> > >> > visual > > > >> > >> > > > > noise > > > >> > >> > > > > > without losing the structure we have today. > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Also +1 to Shahar's idea of unifying the core and > > > providers > > > >> > bug > > > >> > >> > > report > > > >> > >> > > > > > templates. That feels like the bigger simplification > > win > > > in > > > >> > >> > reducing > > > >> > >> > > > the > > > >> > >> > > > > > current template count. > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > Thanks, > > > >> > >> > > > > > Rahul > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
