Re: "Breeze" dev environment

2019-08-28 Thread Felix Uellendall
Great job Jarek! Thanks. I am looking forward to try it out as soon as I am back from holiday :) Felix Sent from ProtonMail mobile Original Message On Aug 28, 2019, 10:34, Jarek Potiuk wrote: > Just FYI. We had some "teething" problems (of course) at the workshop but > fixes

Re: Setting to add choice of schedule at end or schedule at start of interval

2019-08-28 Thread James Meickle
Totally agree with Daniel here. I think that if we implement this feature as proposed, it will actively discourage us from implementing a better data-aware feature that would remain invisible to most users while neatly addressing a lot of edge cases that currently require really ugly hacks. I belie

Re: Setting to add choice of schedule at end or schedule at start of interval

2019-08-28 Thread Daniel Standish
I am just thinking there is the potential for a more comprehensive enhancement here, and I worry that this is a band-aid that, like all new features has the potential to constrain future options. It does not help us to do anything we cannot already do. The source of this problem is that schedulin

Re: [RESULT] Change the Airflow logo

2019-08-28 Thread Ash Berlin-Taylor
Yes of course - I've been busy on a client site this week and haven't had chance to even look at emails much :) Will do as soon as I can. -a > On 28 Aug 2019, at 03:48, Aizhamal Nurmamat kyzy > wrote: > > Thanks Ash! The current place for logos is: > https://github.com/apache/airflow/tree/ma

Re: Codecov Integration

2019-08-28 Thread Jarek Potiuk
Apologies - I broke it at some point of time when introducing new CI approach. This one commit that Kaxil mentions was supposed to fix it :). I think it was broken afterwards or during rebase. The problem with codecov is that until you merge it to master you never know if it finally works or not (i

Re: Codecov Integration

2019-08-28 Thread Kaxil Naik
It seems to be not doing much as it is unable to find a dependency. _ _ 10217 / || | 10218| | ___ __| | ___ ___ _ __ 10219| |/ _ \ / _` |/ _ \/ __/ _ \ \ / / 10220| |___| (_) | (_| | __/ (_| (_) \ V / 10221 \_\___/ \__,_|\___|\___\___/ \_/ 10222

Re: Codecov Integration

2019-08-28 Thread Kaxil Naik
The change seems to be that the CodeCov is now embedded inside tests and is run at last. Check this: https://travis-ci.org/apache/airflow/jobs/577789685#L10216 On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:49 PM Kaxil Naik wrote: > Looks like this commit: > https://github.com/apache/airflow/commit/8b41c3f12944c

Re: Codecov Integration

2019-08-28 Thread Kaxil Naik
Looks like this commit: https://github.com/apache/airflow/commit/8b41c3f12944c9b87fd04bd7137ba03d7e5a502f#diff-2eeaed663bd0d25b7e608891384b7298 changed it. On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:39 PM Driesprong, Fokko wrote: > I've noticed that the latest reports are at 2019-08-08: > https://codecov.io

Re: Codecov Integration

2019-08-28 Thread Driesprong, Fokko
I've noticed that the latest reports are at 2019-08-08: https://codecov.io/github/apache/airflow?branch=master But I don't see any commits that day that changed any significantly on that area: https://github.com/apache/airflow/commits/master?after=f40b3b5dd766f271447fef282bb6681bff575814+139 Op w

Re: Codecov Integration

2019-08-28 Thread Driesprong, Fokko
Hi Kaxil, I did notice that the coveralls library is gone, we had this before to push it to codecov. I know that the names are different, and it is confusing, I tried to remove it before: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/3295 Let us see if it works again when reenabling this library: https:

Codecov Integration

2019-08-28 Thread Kaxil Naik
Did we remove codecov.io integration from Airflow? Previously on each PR we used to get info if the Code Coverage would increase/decrease by what % if it is merged. Regards, Kaxil

Re: "Breeze" dev environment

2019-08-28 Thread Jarek Potiuk
Just FYI. We had some "teething" problems (of course) at the workshop but fixes to it are already merged to master (thanks Kaxil for the review)! J. On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 2:17 AM Chao-Han Tsai wrote: > Thanks Jarek for the hard work. It really improved the airflow development > experience a l