[LAZY CONSENSUS] define supporting older Python/Kubernetes versions as best efforts

Hello everyone, We already have a policy stated as Support for Python and Kubernetes versions The suggested change to the policy is: * This policy is best-effort which means there may be situations where we might

Re: AIP-56 Extensible user management

Hello, I tried to answer to all open questions: > If I understand correctly, the proposition in AIP-56 is to introduce an > interface as generic as possible so that any potential federated identity > protocol can be integrated in Airflow through User Manager (or as proposed in > this thread,

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on May 24, 2023

+1 non binding . Tested microsoft.azure: 6.1.1rc1 and it works as expected On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 9:16 PM Pankaj Koti wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Concurring with Wei. > > On Wed, 24 May 2023, 21:09 Wei Lee, wrote:

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on May 24, 2023

+1 (non-binding) Concurring with Wei. On Wed, 24 May 2023, 21:09 Wei Lee, wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > Test all the providers with example DAGs > > > On May 24, 2023, at 3:46 PM, Elad Kalif wrote: > > > > Hey all,I have just cut ad hoc wave Airflow Providers packages. This > > email is calling

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on May 24, 2023

+1 (non-binding) Test all the providers with example DAGs > On May 24, 2023, at 3:46 PM, Elad Kalif wrote: > > Hey all,I have just cut ad hoc wave Airflow Providers packages. This > email is calling a vote on the release,which will last for 72 hours - > which means that it will end on May 27,

[VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on May 24, 2023

Hey all,I have just cut ad hoc wave Airflow Providers packages. This email is calling a vote on the release,which will last for 72 hours - which means that it will end on May 27, 2023 07:45 AM UTCConsider this my (binding) +1. Airflow Providers are available