sadpandajoe commented on code in PR #42542:
URL: https://github.com/apache/superset/pull/42542#discussion_r3687074021
##########
superset/db_engine_specs/mysql.py:
##########
@@ -183,6 +184,7 @@ class MySQLEngineSpec(BasicParametersMixin, BaseEngineSpec):
DatabaseCategory.CLOUD_AWS,
DatabaseCategory.HOSTED_OPEN_SOURCE,
],
+ "known_incompatibilities":
AURORA_DATA_API_KNOWN_INCOMPATIBILITIES,
Review Comment:
When docs generation falls back to AST extraction, this name is serialized
as the literal string `AURORA_DATA_API_KNOWN_INCOMPATIBILITIES` rather than the
list; the inline D1/Kusto/Solr values work. Could we either inline this value
or teach the extractor to resolve module-level literal constants?
##########
superset/db_engine_specs/d1.py:
##########
@@ -48,4 +48,15 @@ class CloudflareD1EngineSpec(SqliteEngineSpec):
"cloudflare_d1_database_id": "D1 database ID",
},
"install_instructions": "pip install superset-engine-d1",
+ "known_incompatibilities": [
+ {
+ "dependency": "SQLAlchemy 2.0",
+ "reason": (
+ "sqlalchemy-d1 is very young (single release, Nov 2025); "
+ "no confirmed SQLAlchemy 2.0 support either way yet."
+ ),
+ "tracking_url":
("https://github.com/sqlalchemy-cf-d1/sqlalchemy-d1";),
Review Comment:
The only `sqlalchemy-d1` release declares `sqlalchemy<2,>=1.4`, so “no
confirmed SQLAlchemy 2.0 support either way” understates an explicit resolver
incompatibility. Could we say that it excludes SQLAlchemy 2.0 so operators know
this extra will block the core bump?
##########
superset/db_engine_specs/base.py:
##########
@@ -317,6 +347,11 @@ class DBEngineSpecMetadata(TypedDict, total=False):
install_instructions: str
version_requirements: str
+ # Known, currently-unresolved incompatibilities with a Superset
+ # dependency (e.g. a driver that doesn't yet support SQLAlchemy 2.0).
+ # Hopefully temporary; remove the entry once resolved upstream.
+ known_incompatibilities: list[KnownIncompatibility]
Review Comment:
This field reaches generated JSON, but the docs types and `DatabasePage`
have no consumer for it, so these warnings remain invisible on the published
database pages. Could we add the TypeScript contract and render these
incompatibilities, including compatible-database entries?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
