[RESULT][VOTE] OTEL Provider to Apache Airflow

Hi all, The vote for OTEL Provider to Apache Airflow has not received any votes, therefore the proposed implementation is not going to proceed. Thanks to everybody for their interest in this matter. Discussion thread https://lists.apache.org/thread/9234s5c33k3hrwdp1jq5mhhcyl8ntc0w Vote thread: h

Re: [DISCUSS] allow_trigger_in_future setting: keep or chop?

I also lean toward allowing it, and removing the configuration sounds good. Best, Wei > On Aug 22, 2024, at 4:00 AM, Jarek Potiuk wrote: > > weak allow as well. > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 8:31 PM Oliveira, Niko > wrote: > >> I don't feel too strongly about this one (I suppose I also lean al

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] AIP-80: Explicit Template Fields in Operator Arguments

Ups forgot to respond here, in case of doubt after the last rework I am also in with a +1 binding. Thanks for the adjustments and the great initiative for improvement! Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Tzu-ping Chung Sent: Monday, August 26,

[RESULT][VOTE] AIP-80: Explicit Template Fields in Operator Arguments

Hi, The vote for AIP-80: Explicit Template Fields in Operator Arguments has concluded successfully. The proposal has been accepted. Since there’s an update midway through the vote, I’ll calculate votes in two parts. If you voted in more than once, only the last one counts. (Sorry I really mean

Re: [VOTE] AIP-76: Asset Partitions

I meant to do this last week but totally forgot. Since no-one really expressed any more concerns, I’ll finish the process and declare the results in a new thread. TP > On 5 Aug 2024, at 14:15, Ephraim Anierobi wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 at 21:14, Jarek Potiuk wrote: >