notatallshaw-gts commented on PR #27111:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/27111#issuecomment-1313106307
> With my Airflow (1.14.15), the SLA miss was not detected in your scenario
(#26566) until the second DAG run.
>
> I might have found the reason. Airflow 1.14.15 does che
notatallshaw-gts commented on PR #27111:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/27111#issuecomment-1312176736
> I confirm that the first SLA check is counter-intuitively relative to a
date in the future.
I'm not sure I completely follow this working. Do you have a concrete
examp
notatallshaw-gts commented on PR #27111:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/27111#issuecomment-1311920464
> I am not advocating for re-opening this issue now, but I wonder if it
might still lack clarity?
>
> Contrary to what one would intuitively expect, isn't the SLA relativ
notatallshaw-gts commented on PR #27111:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/27111#issuecomment-1293526817
@potiuk Whenever you get a chance, any objections?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
notatallshaw-gts commented on PR #27111:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/27111#issuecomment-1282856619
I don't think the build doc error is related to this change? At least as I'm
interpreting the log output.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To resp
