-1 on common as well, +1 to standard/essentials (non-binding)
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Tue, 20 Aug 2024, 5:03 pm Elad Kalif, wrote:
> > IMHO this vote is about a code change
>
> Then we will consider PMCs -1 as veto which disqualifies the specific name.
> Looks like standard
Yeah, I think essential sounds pretty good as well. Good suggestion Pavan
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, 3:09 am Jarek Potiuk, wrote:
> I like "essential" - how about "apache-airflow-provider-essentials" - that
> will not limit it to only operators, we
Congrats Jens!
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Tue, 6 Aug 2024, 3:47 pm rom sharon, wrote:
> !!Congratulations Jens
>
> בתאריך יום ג׳, 6 באוג׳ 2024 ב-13:00 מאת Utkarsh Sharma
> <utkarsh.sha...@astronomer.io.invalid>:
>
> > Congratulations Jens! :)
> >
> &g
+1 (non-binding)
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Fri, 26 Jul 2024, 10:32 pm Sadha Chilukoori,
wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Fri, Jul 26, 2024, 9:04 AM Scheffler Jens (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T)
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Brent and me have revised the AIP-68 based on the
+1 (non-binding)
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Thu, 25 Jul 2024, 1:14 pm Tzu-ping Chung,
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I’m calling for a vote on AIP-80: Explicit Template Fields in Operator
> Arguments.
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/2grOEg
>
> This proposal aims to improv
+1 non-binding
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Jul 22, 2024, 7:40 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> +1 binding
>
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 4:05 PM Phani Kumar
> wrote:
>
> > +1 binding
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 7:22 PM Maciej Obuchowski <
> mobuchow...@apac
+1 non-binding
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024, 10:40 pm Igor Kholopov,
wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Sat, Jul 20, 2024 at 4:31 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 20, 2024 at 12:39 PM Rahul Vats
> > wrote:
>
+1 non-binding
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Sat, Jul 20, 2024, 8:03 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> J.
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 20, 2024 at 12:15 PM Wei Lee wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Best,
> > Wei
> >
> > > On Jul 20, 2
+1 non-binding
Tested my changes and they seem to be working as expected
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Jul 15, 2024, 6:03 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
> +1 binding: Checked signs, checksums & licenses
>
>
>
> On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 at 14:22, Jarek Potiuk wrote:
>
>
A question, is there a way for the dosu bot to label issues as labelled by
the bot? It'll make it a bit easier to filter out the issues to monitor?
Though I guess if the activity is only for a couple of weeks maybe it's not
worth adding a new label just for that
--
Regards,
Aritra Ba
Congrats Ryan! Awesome to see it!
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 11:58 PM Elad Kalif wrote:
> Congrats!
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 9:17 PM Vikram Koka
> wrote:
>
> > Awesome!
> > Congratulations Ryan!
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2024
scuss what the workflow we're picturing for it
is. But I would like it if a reporter is unable to see the comment until
it's approved (which I guess is exactly what you're also suggesting Jarek).
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Thu, Jun 27, 2024, 12:01 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Julian -
I love this idea, I think it would really help with organising dags and
categorising them.
Thanks and Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 10:08 AM Amogh Desai
wrote:
> I like this idea too.
>
> The ability to extend filtering at this level would be fantastic. IIUC, the
>
estricting the bot to just tagging similar issues while still requiring a
human to provide advice based on that similarity.
Just my personal 2 cents. I'm not too strongly opposed to using it.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Thu, Jun 27, 2024, 2:41 AM Julian LaNeve
wrote:
> Not sure if I ge
Agreed, overall sounds like a positive change. Don't see any issues with it
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024, 10:28 PM Ferruzzi, Dennis
wrote:
> Sounds good, I don't see a down side and "supply chain security" has been
> a big concern
+1 (non-binding)
Checked a few dags, looks good
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024, 5:23 PM Ephraim Anierobi
wrote:
> +1(binding). Checked files, reproducibility, signatures, licenses, and
> checksums
>
> On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 at 12:49, Hussein Awala wrote:
>
> >
Hi Jarek,
I'd be interested to join.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Sat, Jun 8, 2024, 12:24 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Hello here,
>
> At PyCon US I met a few people from Nielsen who had developed internally
> tooling for IDE/Python debugger integrated debugging of Airflow D
+1 (non-binding)
The proposal was a good read, would love to see it come up and would love
to help out if you need a helping hand.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Sat, May 18, 2024, 7:15 PM Christian Schilling
wrote:
> Hi Jens,
>
> Thank you very much for the proposal!
> This would be
+1 non-binding
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Thu, May 9, 2024, 10:36 AM Amogh Desai wrote:
> +1 binding
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Amogh Desai
>
>
> On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 10:29 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
>
> > Short reminder and correction :).
> >
> > Wei
+1 (non-binding)
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024, 7:42 PM Bishundeo, Rajeshwar
wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> -- Rajesh
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2024-04-18, 10:11 AM, "Vincent Beck" vincb...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
>
> CAUTION: This em
I tend to agree with Wei here, if process can fix the issue maybe it
shouldn't go into code.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Apr 15, 2024, 9:42 AM Amogh Desai wrote:
> I agree with the points made by Andrey here.
>
> > End users use amazon provider and google provide
+1 (non-binding)
tested against some sample dags
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Sat, Apr 13, 2024, 4:21 AM Hussein Awala wrote:
> +1 (binding) checked licences, checksums, signatures and sources, tested my
> changes and run some testing dags for cncf.kuberenetes and amazon
> provider
Congrats wei! Great job!
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Apr 8, 2024, 4:17 PM wrote:
> Congrats Wei!
>
> > On Apr 8, 2024, at 5:31 AM, Pankaj Singh
> wrote:
> >
> > Congrats Wei, very well deserved!
> >
> >> On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 2:33 PM Rahul V
I'm +0. Definitely don't see any issue with seeing the changes.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Fri, Apr 5, 2024, 3:37 PM Amogh Desai wrote:
> +1 I like the idea.
> Looking forward to seeing the difference.
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Amogh Desai
>
>
> On Fri, A
+1 yeah, this sounds useful to me
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Sat, Mar 30, 2024, 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> +1. All that sounds reasonable, there are precedents, ASF supports Scarf
> officially. Would be great to have access to such telemetry data.
>
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 1
+1 (non-binding)
This is quite good, I'd thought in passing that it'd be useful to have.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024, 10:46 PM Jed Cunningham
wrote:
> Hello Airflow Community,
>
> I would like to start a vote on AIP-64: Keep TaskInstance try history.
>
I'm in general not a huge fan of documenting for the sake of documenting,
so I'd be in agreement of not enforcing it via code but rather be enforced
by the reviewers in cases they believe certain methods need documenting.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Wed, Mar 20, 2024, 9:39 AM Jarek Pot
+1 (non-binding)
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Wed, Mar 13, 2024, 7:27 PM Bishundeo, Rajeshwar
wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> -- Rajesh
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2024-03-13, 9:40 AM, "Vincent Beck" vincb...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
>
> CAUTION: This em
+1 (non-binding)
Tested against some test dags, don't see any regressions
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Sat, Mar 9, 2024, 10:27 AM Amogh Desai wrote:
> +1 non binding.
> Installed and ran some example DAGs. All looks good.
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Amogh Desai
>
>
+1 (non-binding)
Tested a few dags as well as verified my changes.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Fri, Feb 23, 2024, 3:09 PM Amogh Desai wrote:
> +1 non binding
>
> Installed the RC with pip and tested few dags using `airflow standalone`
> and also verified my changes
>
>
+1 the names sound good to me as well
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Tue, Feb 13, 2024, 12:45 AM Vincent Beck wrote:
> +1
>
> On 2024/02/12 19:12:05 Briana Okyere wrote:
> > Same, +1
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 9:15 AM Oliveira, Niko
>
> > wrote:
> >
Hmm, I'm not a big fan of dev support since I would see it as support for a
developer using airflow vs a developer developing airflow. I much prefer
contributing since it makes it clear it's for someone contributing to
airflow.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Fri, Feb 9, 2024, 10:42 AM A
I also prefer contributing and troubleshooting over the longer names. But
also not opposed to the other names
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Thu, Feb 8, 2024, 8:24 PM Kenten Danas
wrote:
> +1 for updating the names. I like #contributing/#troubleshooting, and agree
> #best-practices woul
+1 (non-binding) from me based on my past comments on the thread.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Feb 5, 2024, 8:07 PM Pankaj Koti
wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> *Pankaj Koti*
> Senior Software Engineer (Airflow OSS Engineering team)
> Location:
I'm very much for anonymity here, so if we could have some kind of bot
that'd be great. Though even without that I think the combination of
channel and form also works out fine for talking to a person vs wanting
anonymity.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Sat, Feb 3, 2024, 9:12 PM Andrey Ans
+1 (non-binding)
This would definitely be a good value add. Looked through the proposal and
it looks solid! Great job!
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Thu, Feb 1, 2024, 12:58 PM Amogh Desai wrote:
> +1 binding
>
> Good work on the proposal, Niko.
>
> The most important part of this
I personally haven't had too much friction due to the change and it has
helped me keep track of any comments people have made. I remain +1 to the
change so far.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024, 6:11 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Just wanted to remind everyone, we are nearing th
I added a comment, but would a Google form work. Responses can be shared
with the committee.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Sat, Jan 27, 2024, 12:06 AM Constance Martineau
wrote:
> Indeed, not having groups is a limitation of free slack. Maybe the
> compromise is bookmarking the individua
+1 non-binding
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Wed, Jan 24, 2024, 8:02 PM Utkarsh Sharma
wrote:
> +1 Non-binding.
>
> Thanks,
> Utkarsh Sharma
>
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 6:11 PM Pankaj Koti
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 24 Jan
My vote is for #36537 it's been a huge effort and it makes huge
improvements in our packaging. Great to see it make it into airflow.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Tue, Jan 23, 2024, 10:13 AM Amogh Desai wrote:
> Is there a possibility to vote for more than one? I guess not :/
>
> M
+1 non binding
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 5:35 AM Wei Lee wrote:
> +1 non binding
>
> Best,
> Wei
>
> > On Jan 17, 2024, at 2:54 AM, Josh Fell
> wrote:
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 1:53 PM Vincent Beck
Congrats Andrey!!
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Tue, Jan 16, 2024, 12:24 AM Vincent Beck wrote:
> Congrats Andrey!
>
> On 2024/01/15 18:46:32 ambika garg wrote:
> > Congrats Andrey!!
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 1:44 PM Amogh Desai
> > wrote:
> >
> &g
+1 non binding
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Jan 8, 2024, 11:38 PM Pankaj Singh wrote:
> +1 (non binding)
>
> On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 11:19 PM Vincent Beck wrote:
>
> > +1 non binding. All AWS system tests are running successfully against
> > apache-airflow-provider
Thanks for the clarification Jarek, I see the value in it. It's a +1 from
me to try it out.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Wed, Dec 20, 2023, 7:04 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Aritra:
>
> > I think it's a fine idea to experient with to see if the advantages
> outweigh the ex
if it's
perhaps something for a follow-up pr? What I mean is it isn't gonna enforce
who can resolve a comment thread?
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Wed, Dec 20, 2023, 4:09 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> If there are no more big objections, I will enable it after the 26th of
> December t
+1 (non binding)
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Sun, Dec 17, 2023, 4:55 PM Amogh Desai wrote:
> +1 non binding
>
> On Sun, 17 Dec 2023 at 4:05 PM, Bolke de Bruin wrote:
>
> > +1 binding
> >
> > Let's get this out.
> >
> > B
> >
> > Se
+1
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Fri, Dec 15, 2023, 8:47 PM Vincent Beck wrote:
> +1
>
> On 2023/12/15 12:51:26 Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> > +1. ESPECIALLY if there will be issues found that we will fix in 2.8.x :D
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 1:47 PM Elad Kalif wrote:
This is great Briana,
Looking forward to it.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 10:02 PM Amogh Desai wrote:
> Amazing! Love how this shaped up :)
>
> Agenda looks great.
>
> On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 at 9:41 PM, Briana Okyere
> wrote:
>
> > Hey All,
> >
Amazing Utkarsh, congratulations!
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Dec 4, 2023, 10:27 PM Phani Kumar
wrote:
> Congratulations Utkarsh ! Well deserved
>
> On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 10:13 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
>
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > [filling-in for Kaxil who
nd of
metric?).
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Dec 4, 2023, 11:56 AM Bartosz Jankiewicz
wrote:
> I've successfully adopted this technique in the past and it served well
> for some use-cases. What I loved about ADR was its simplicity and
> transparency.
>
> As you mentioned -
happenings but not partake in decision
making and once they are done with the shadow period they take on full
responsibility.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Dec 4, 2023, 6:20 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> *TL;DR; *I have a proposal of refinements we can apply to our security t
future.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 10:27 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Yeah. Agree it's a challenge but I think it's also an opportunity to
> fix those - because whether we admit it, or not - we already have those
> problems - regardless of Pendulum's use.
>
This seems like a great idea and a good way to get info out to the
community. I'd love to be involved in any way I can.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Wed, Nov 29, 2023, 11:49 AM Akash Sharma <2akash111...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would like to be involved
>
> Best regards,
> A
+1 to #32646 from me too
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Tue, Nov 28, 2023, 9:50 AM Amogh Desai wrote:
> I vote for #32646
>
> Great work!
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Amogh Desai
>
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 5:41 AM Wei Lee wrote:
>
> > + 1 for 32646
> >
>
+1 (non-binding)
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Nov 27, 2023, 4:10 PM Rahul Vats wrote:
> +1(non-binding)
>
> Regards,
> Rahul Vats
> 9953794332
>
>
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2023 at 13:25, Andrey Anshin
> wrote:
>
> > Tested my changes
> >
> &g
+1
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Sat, Nov 25, 2023, 6:40 AM Wei Lee wrote:
> +1 for removing it.
>
> Best,
> Wei
>
> > On Nov 24, 2023, at 7:17 AM, Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> >
> > Let's remove it.
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 11:52 PM Andre
+1 sounds like a good reason to suspend it and eventually remove it.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023, 4:45 PM Bolke de Bruin wrote:
> +1
>
> Go
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On 23 Nov 2023, at 10:52, Andrey Anshin
> wrote:
> >
> > Greeti
+1 All for removing it if it's not in use and is giving us trouble with
maintaining.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 1:47 PM Amogh Desai wrote:
> Theres very little incentive in maintaining this if theres no one actively
> maintaining it.
>
> I am totally f
Agreed, moving to latest by default sounds like a fine idea. I don't see
any drawbacks to it and seems like a good enough time as any to make the
switch with 2.8.0.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 12:33 AM Vincent Beck wrote:
> I agree, by default we should use the lates
+1 (non binding)
Tested out against some test dags
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Fri, 10 Nov 2023, 6:35 pm Pankaj Koti,
wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Concurring with Rahul Vats on the testing of the mentioned providers.
>
> A big thank you to Elad for skillfully overseeing and syn
Congrats Jens!!
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Wed, Nov 8, 2023, 9:00 AM Wei Lee wrote:
> Congratulations Jens!!
>
> Best,
> Wei
>
> > On Nov 8, 2023, at 5:20 AM, Oliveira, Niko
> wrote:
> >
> > Congrats Jens!!
> >
> > ___
+1 (non-binding)
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023, 9:30 AM Rahul Vats wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Regards,
> Rahul Vats
> 9953794332
>
>
> On Sun, 5 Nov 2023 at 10:53, Pankaj Singh
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > my changes
Ooh, sounds fun. Count me in!
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Thu, Nov 2, 2023, 10:05 PM Briana Okyere
wrote:
> Glad to hear it, Aritra! It means reviewing and helping us present the
> results to the larger community in a valuable way.
>
> EG here is how we did last year
Hey Briana,
What does analysing the results entail? Sounds intriguing, I'd be
interested to help.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Thu, Nov 2, 2023, 9:03 PM Briana Okyere
wrote:
> Hey All,
>
> Thank you so much for this feedback- I reviewed all of your notes yesterday
> with a few o
pinions on this.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Wed, Nov 1, 2023, 7:27 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Alternative proposal.
>
> Why don't we release a new package 'python-client-nextgen' & with new build
> process/generator and release process following the same versioning as
&
+1 to 34729 from me as well. Great work on that
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 11:27 PM Amogh Desai wrote:
> +1 for 34729 from me.
>
> Good work 👍
>
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 21:40 Jarek Potiuk wrote:
>
> > +1 to 34729 as well.
> >
> > On Tu
I'm not sure on the exact heuristics used by the script but how about all
PRs with atleast 1 (or 2 or a specific number) votes from the ones picked
by the script gets featured.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Sat, Oct 28, 2023, 1:04 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Yeah. Top PRs of the month so
Sounds like a good time to set the process up. +1 from me as well.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023, 6:42 PM Vincent Beck wrote:
> I like that. I also think it is important to have a process to remove
> provider if needed. +1
>
> On 2023/10/27 09:00:25 Jarek Potiuk wr
Hi,
I can try helping out, though I haven't much experience working with otel,
so I guess I might be more helpful if there's some implementations already
done to work off of.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023, 9:35 PM Ferruzzi, Dennis
wrote:
> Hello friends! OTe
Yup, sounds good to me let's go for it!
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023, 1:47 PM Amogh Desai wrote:
> Go ahead Utkarsh. It would be nice to work with you along this.
>
> Thanks,
> Amogh Desai
>
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 10:02 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
>
&
+1 (non binding)
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 11:02 PM Ferruzzi, Dennis
wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
>
> - ferruzzi
>
>
>
> From: Jed Cunningham
> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2023 9:54 AM
> To: dev@airflow.apach
+1
Definitely a +1 from me, seems like a relatively small effort to get good
returns
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Tue, Oct 24, 2023, 11:01 PM Vincent Beck wrote:
> +1 I like this one. I think it is totally worth it adding this decorator,
> mostly because I think the effort is not huge.
+1 from me as well, this should enable a lot of new usecases
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Tue, Oct 24, 2023, 11:47 AM Amogh Desai wrote:
> +1 from me as well. Looks like something that the dev community would be
> interested in using and hence contributing as well!
>
> Thanks &
nding that if
2.7.3 doesn't
list 3.12 as supported neither would 2.7.2. But I'd rather be explicitly
told 2.7.3 and earlier
don't work with 3.12.
Thanks and Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 4:54 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> I've opened a PR
me time to help out
given some guidance on what is needed.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Oct 23, 2023, 2:19 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Some news here.
>
> I caught up with some infra changes that happened while I was travelling -
> and I have just (with https://github.com/apache
+1 (non binding)
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Thu, Oct 19, 2023, 9:17 AM cary hawkins wrote:
> +1 non-binding
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Oct 18, 2023, at 3:08 PM, Hussein Awala wrote:
> >
> > +1 (binding). Checked signatures, checksum, licences, source co
+1 (non binding)
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Sun, Oct 15, 2023, 9:27 AM Phani Kumar
wrote:
> +1 non binding
>
> On Sun, 15 Oct 2023, 03:29 Hussein Awala, wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding) I tested the fix and it looks good.
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 14, 2023 at 11:1
Congrats Pankaj and Amogh!
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023, 9:13 PM Pankaj Singh wrote:
> Congrats Pankaj and Amogh!!
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 8:46 PM Rahul Vats wrote:
>
> > Congratulations Pankaj and Amogh.
> >
> > On Tue, 19 Sep, 202
Sounds reasonable to me
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Fri, Sep 8, 2023, 10:03 PM Vincent Beck wrote:
> +1
>
> On 2023/09/08 16:24:10 "Ferruzzi, Dennis" wrote:
> > I like it.
> >
> >
> > - ferruzzi
> >
> >
> > _
+1 from me,
Seems reasonable
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Thu, Aug 31, 2023, 8:40 PM Josh Fell
wrote:
> It all seems very reasonable to me. +1
>
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 9:23 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
>
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > Following our process [1] I am c
I agree with Pierre's idea of setting a debug variable. I think that'd
maybe hammer home the point and also will block out enough functionality
that people shouldn't use it in prod.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Thu, Aug 31, 2023, 11:08 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Yep. I am
k how much it's reducing effort seeing as you
mentioned writing a docker container on top of ours isn't a significant
overhead) and then anything close to production forces you to do things the
right way?
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Tue, Aug 29, 2023, 6:55 PM Andrey Anshin
wrote:
>
discourage it's usage
in prod?
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Tue, Aug 29, 2023, 4:59 PM Andrey Anshin
wrote:
> Airflow Trial Mode ON :D
>
> > It is aggressive, yes. I wonder what you think. Is it too aggressive?
>
> I think is not enough :D This one would be
>
> if [[ -n
+1 (non-binding)
Based on reading the previous mails, looks like a good idea to drop along
with the migration support
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Aug 28, 2023, 11:33 PM Oliveira, Niko
wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
>
> From: Jed Cunningham
> Sent:
+1 (non binding)
Lgtm. Tested out a few simple dags.
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Mon, Aug 28, 2023, 11:07 PM Phani Kumar
wrote:
> +1 non binding.
>
> On Mon, 28 Aug 2023, 23:04 Ankit Chaurasia, wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding) as we will exclude microsoft.azure.
> &
+1 (non binding)
Tested out on breeze env with some dags
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023, 12:17 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Checked signatures, checksums, licences, source code, all good, Run airflow
> in breeze with/without Celery (with installing p
+1 (non-binding)
Tested CNCF providers
--
Regards,
Aritra Basu
On Thu, Aug 10, 2023, 8:02 PM Utkarsh Sharma
wrote:
> +1 non-binding
>
> Thanks,
> Utkarsh Sharma
>
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 4:05 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
> >
> > +1 binding
> >
> > On Thu,
87 matches
Mail list logo
