Hi,
+1 (binding)
Beginning from Cloud Composer 1.7.7 users have the possibility to use DAG
Serialization feature to improve reliability of their Airflow Webservers -
we backported it to Airflow 1.10.2 container images that Composers can use
while creating their Airflow environments. By default, w
Dear Airflow People,
Following up to
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/airflow-dev/201812.mbox/%3c9a85db58-cef7-4b9a-9cfb-20cd5bfce...@gmail.com%3e
The CWL AIrflow paper has been published!
Michael Kotliar, Andrey V Kartashov, Artem Barski, CWL-Airflow: a
lightweight pipeline manager supp
The issue Jarek pointed out is a blocker for releasing
https://apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#license-headers.
We will add those missing license headers and make an RC 2 with no other
changes (i.e. we won't include the commits already on v1-10-test after RC1) so
the next vote should be a
I agree with what Jarek is saying. And if just for testing a user wants to
see what his template field would look like they can used airflow render
from the cli
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 3:19 PM Jarek Potiuk
wrote:
> Great work!
>
> I also think it's a pragmatic and reasonable approach to add it t
Great work!
I also think it's a pragmatic and reasonable approach to add it to 1.10 and
work on improved version for 2.0 (and have it as the only option).
This way we do not really add unnecessary complexity - we will just improve
the serialized implementation in our 2.0 effort, we close all the g
+1. binding Works fine for me as well. Python3.6 with example DAGs.
I noticed a few small issues for the source package but they are likely not
blocking (please confirm, it's the first time I am looking into it as PMC):
- breeze-complete has no licence (RAT 0.13 detected it - will switch to
Thank you,
I fine with adding it to 1.10 as the current PR where is it an option, and
for now, the current behavior would be the old one, until smooth out all
the issues.
For 2.0 I'd love to see it as the only option so we can remove the logic
and code of the SimpleDag to keep the codebase nice a
+1 binding.
- Ran an example DAG with the local executor under Python 3.7.
- Checked the sha hashes:
MacBook-Pro-van-Fokko:Downloads fokkodriesprong$ shasum -a 512
apache-airflow-1.10.6rc1-bin.tar.gz
a4bde283b3f32fbc7a603da6deb3f015bda470b3dba1934a40b72212eba5391a9365400b8595d61afd27b2f8b6d9be220
Hi all,
Works fine for me, +1 (non-binding)
Tested on python 3.6 with postgres, run few GCP examples and some examples
DAGs from UI.
Bests,
Tomek
On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 12:34 AM Kaxil Naik wrote:
> +1 (binding) - tested on Py 3.7.3 with example DAGs
>
> On Sat, Oct 19, 2019 at 11:30 AM Ash Be
Well at least we would love to start using it on our 1.10.* cluster before
having to upgrade to 2.0. It is a huge change yes because it provides huge
value so I would image there are more people like us want to start using it
ASAP :D
I agree that if the XCOM part of the rendered template is not as
Speaking with my Astronomer hat on, we are going to include this in our next
1.10.x image as this improves the experience when deploying changes. We could
not backport it to the v-1-10-test for inclusion in next release, but the work
to backport it is already done.
Yes, making this the default
Awesome work all,
I would be more in the opposite direction. Maybe we should not backport
such a huge change to 1.10 and work on it for 2.0. Also, I'd like to see it
as being default in 2.0, having it as an option will introduce another
permutation in the configuration and this will make the whole
Just saw the latest email from Kaxil and want to clarify. I was replying
the previous posts and making general comments instead of trying to block
the PR from being merged. I'm fine with merging it and improve
incrementally. It is quite polished and already huge now, I can totally
relate to the reb
Oops, I guess I'm too slow reading the PRs to let me vote in time 😛
Congrats Zhou, Kaxil and Ash for getting it accepted 🎉
I'm pretty excited about this long-anticipated change and thank you guys
for the great work. Though I do have a few comments.
I agree with Dan's concern about maintaining two
Hi guys,
I have addressed all comments on the PR:
https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/5743
Can we merge this PR please if everything looks good and approved by the
committers? It is becoming increasingly difficult to rebase on master and
resolve conflicts.
I also have the backport PR (https:
15 matches
Mail list logo
