Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on July 09, 2024

+1 non binding Ran example dags for cncf and docker, thing seem to work fine. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 7:22 AM Wei Lee wrote: > +1 for providers other than weaviate. Ran our example DAGs and worked fine. > > Best, > Wei > > > >

Re: ASF download link broken

Thanks Jarek. Yes this change was intentional. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 7:25 PM, Jarek Potiuk wrote: > > Thanks. Looks better now. You might want to consider linking directly to > the airflow directory: > > I think it's better to keep it this

Re: ASF download link broken

Alright, noted. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Fri, Jul 5, 2024 at 2:29 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > One think also - we will have to manually post-process html documents for > airflow-site as well as the links are generated in html for old versions of > docs as well. Bu

Re: ASF download link broken

Should be a quick fix in that case. Thanks for letting me know Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 2:07 PM, Jarek Potiuk wrote: > I think it should be https://dlcdn.apache.org/ - I think the link is from > the times when we did not have CDN but mirroring syste

Re: ASF download link broken

Hi Mark, Thanks for your email. I can see that the link is active and leads to a webpage, but the CSS seems to be broken. Is that your issue or something else? Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Fri, Jul 5, 2024 at 12:31 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > Hi Airflow community, > > Wh

Re: [DISCUSS] @remove provide_bucket_name and @unify_bucket_name_and_key?

considerations because we know how users are using certain patterns (aligns with point 1) 3. Easier for new contributors to contribute to :) I am all up for cleaning up the codebase if we have something of this nature. My 2c. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Tue, Jul 2, 2024 at 4:29 AM Da

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New committer: Ryan Hatter

Congratulations Ryan! Welcome onboard :) Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 10:32 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > Congrats! > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 6:59 PM Jed Cunningham > wrote: > > > The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Airflow &g

Re: Using AI / Dosu to help us with triaging issues

Love this! One thing we need to be a little sure of is the "honesty" while answering these bot suggestions, at least initially, so that the bot settles well into our ecosystem. I am happy with the direction this is heading into Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 1

Re: [VOTE] June 2024 PR of the Month

My vote would definitely go to https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/39355! Developers love dark mode, and I mean it is done fantastically! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 3:57 AM Kaxil Naik wrote: > My vote would be biased to #39355 because it is DARK MODE :

Re: Using AI / Dosu to help us with triaging issues

for two reasons: 1. Maintainer/Contributor responses are tailored personally to a question and the level of the issue reporter 2. Bot responses sometimes are disregarded by readers, just because its a "bot" Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 8:53 AM Aritra Basu wr

Re: [DISCUSS][AIP-38 Modern Web Application]

Airflow UI much more intuitive. I am not so sure what you mean by "domain" though.. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 8:03 PM Constance Martineau wrote: > I love it and 100% agree. Thinking "Dag Groups", where you can group dags > (static &am

Re: [PROPOSAL] Use Trusted Publishing workflow for Airflow releases to PyPI

Excellent proposal! I see no down-side to the proposal Good investigation on the higher level implementation part as well. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 10:28 AM Poorvi Rohidekar < poorvirohidekar@gmail.com> wrote: > Looks like a good proposal

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on June 22, 2024

+1 non binding Tested some example dags in cncf and hive providers. My changes work well too! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 1:02 AM Marcus Eagan wrote: > Amazing work! > > On Sat, Jun 22, 2024 at 07:47 Jarek Potiuk wrote: > > > +1 (bindi

Re: [LAZY CONSENSUS] Introduce common.compat provider

This is awesome. Waiting to see how it works in action! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Sat, Jun 22, 2024 at 2:04 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > Common compat provider is added. Now we can use it for any kind of > compatibility code with earlier Airflow versions. We might add

Re: [Meeting Notes] Airflow 3.0 Dev call - 13 June 2024

You have covered the minutes of the meeting thoroughly, Kaxil. Finally got the calls added to my calendar too :) Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 6:55 AM Wei Lee wrote: > Thanks Kaxil for summarising! Also tried to update the invitations through > the link

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Airflow Helm Chart 1.14.0 based on 1.14.0rc1

+1 non binding Installed the chart in a Kind cluster and ran a few simple example dags. Looks fine! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Sat, Jun 15, 2024 at 8:49 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > +1 (binding). Tested reproducibility, checksums, signatures, licences. All > good. Installed

Re: Call with Nielsen team demoing their DAG debugging feature

I agree with you Jarek. Every developer has their own way of debugging things and sharing those with the community including the best practices. There is always scope for improvement to the documentation! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 12:17 PM Jarek Potiuk w

Re: [Meeting Notes] Airflow 3.0 Dev call - 4 June 2024

Amazing summary @Kaxil Naik ! I reviewed the discussion points and I am happy with them so far. I only have a few minor comments which I have posted on confluence. Looking forward to attending these calls in future. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Sat, Jun 8, 2024 at 12:15 PM Jarek Po

Re: [DISCUSS] common.compat provider (WAS: Common.util provider?)

s the case. Can you elaborate? Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 4:15 PM Jakub Dardziński wrote: > As the author of https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/39530 I love the > idea. > > * when providers get >= airflow 2.10 - we change them to import from >

Re: Call with Nielsen team demoing their DAG debugging feature

Hello Jarek, Please add me to the invite as well. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 11:22 AM Abhishek Bhakat wrote: > Hi Jarek, > > I would also like to join as well, please. > > Thanks, > Avi > > On Sat, Jun 8, 2024 at 3:32 PM Buğra Öztürk

Re: [PROPOSAL] Automated managemenet of lower-bounds of airflow dependencies

Great work! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 10:42 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > And ... merged :). We should now have very nice automated upgrading of > lower-bound constraints for Airflow and Providers working for all PRs. If > there will be any problems with you

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Podcast Launch- The Data Flowcast: Mastering Airflow for Data Engineering & AI

This is very cool! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Sat, Jun 1, 2024 at 4:44 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > Cool > > On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 7:02 PM Briana Okyere > wrote: > > > Hey All, > > > > Very excited to announce the relaunch of the Airflow Podcast

Re: [REMINDER] Airflow 3 Dev call today

Hi Kaxil, I wont be able to make it today because I am travelling. Will we be recording these meetings as well? Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 at 3:37 PM, Kaxil Naik wrote: > Hello all, > > Just a reminder that we will have our dev call today. > > Ag

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on May 26, 2024

+1 non binding Tested my changes for Hive Provider and things work fine. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 8:40 AM Josh Fell wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 7:24 PM Wei Lee wrote: > > > -1 (non-binding) for apache-airflow-pro

Re: Airflow 3 Dev Calls: Registration + Schedule

/tZAsde2vqDwpE9XrBAbCeIFHA_l7OLywrWkG/calendar/google/add takes me to Astronomer SSO. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 1:56 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > Just a note - the first meeting is on 30th of May which is holiday in quite > a number of countries (Corpus Crist

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal to enhance Backfills

Good proposal! I like the idea here but again talking in terms of timelines, do we make it in Airflow 2 if it's that critical or can it wait till Airflow 3? I think we should scope this out and add some technical data to back this up before making this an AIP. Thanks & Regards, Amogh D

Re: [HUGE DISCUSSION] Airflow3 and tactical (Airflow 2) vs strategic (Airflow 3) approach

I agree with Andrey too on this. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 7:42 PM Kaxil Naik wrote: > Agreed on your points @andrey.ans...@taragol.is > > On Fri, 17 May 2024 at 15:01, Andrey Anshin > wrote: > > > IMHO, In case if we decide to keep only

Re: [HUGE DISCUSSION] Airflow3 and tactical (Airflow 2) vs strategic (Airflow 3) approach

it be simpler :) However, I have a small concern with the proportion of the users that would like to migrate to an early version of Airflow 3 if we do not support various deployment modes. If we dont get enough initial feedback, we do not know how the new major is doing, no? Thanks & Regards, Amogh D

Re: [VOTE] AIP-67 Multi-team deployment of Airflow components

- depending on the scope of Airflow 3 changes we will target -some of the changes proposed have a significant overlap with the multi-teamproposal and we should make sure to discuss it as part of our Airflow 3planning.* Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 1:35 PM Jarek Potiuk w

Re: [VOTE] Proposal for adding Telemetry via Scarf

+1 binding Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 10:29 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > Short reminder and correction :). > > Wei Lee - as a committer, your vote is binding for any votes except > releases. Releases are special - they are a legal act of the > Apache

Re: [DISCUSS] simplifying try_number handling

Looks good to me. Personally I never ran into any issues with this so far but I agree with the issues it solves. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 2:50 AM Vincent Beck wrote: > I am all +1 on this one. This thing gave me headaches when working on > AIP-44 a

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.1 from 2.9.1rc2

+1 non binding Performed the same tests as RC1 and found no issues. Installed the RC, ran a few DAGs from my tests, and random clicks on UI. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 1:03 AM Ephraim Anierobi wrote: > Hey fellow Airflowers, > > I have cut Air

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on May 01, 2024

+1 non binding Installed the tarball and ran some example DAGs for hive and cncf provider, works as expected. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Wed, May 1, 2024 at 10:49 PM Vincent Beck wrote: > +1 non binding. All AWS system tests are working successfully against > apache-airflow

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.1 from 2.9.1rc1

+1 non binding Did a general testing by installing the RC, ran a few DAGs, performed some random clicks on the UI, things seem to be working as expected. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Wed, May 1, 2024 at 10:32 PM Scheffler Jens (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) wrote: > +1 (non binding) - tested 2

Re: [VOTE] April 2024 PR of the Month

My vote goes to #38674. Awesome work Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Wed, 1 May 2024 at 9:21 PM, Jed Cunningham wrote: > I'll also vote for 38674 - cool stuff! >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Airflow Python Client 2.9.0 from 2.9.0rc1

+1 non binding Installed the RC with breeze and was able to test some basic functionalities of the client like listing DAGs, getting tasks, creating DAGruns, retrieving configuration, mainly through test_python_client.py. Looks good to me. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Tue, Apr 23,

Re: [HUGE DISCUSSION] Airflow3 and tactical (Airflow 2) vs strategic (Airflow 3) approach

igger for Airflow". Would be obliged if someone could explain that portion to me :) Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 1:52 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > Just one comment here - while maybe "shocking" for some cases - yes, this > one has been clearly c

Re: [DISCUSS] DRAFT AIP-68 Extended Plugin Interface + AIP-69 Remote Executor

& Regards, Amogh Desai On Sat, Apr 20, 2024 at 3:55 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > Hey Jens, > > I looked at the AIPs when you created them and I very much like the > directions put there - but it also got me into a lot of thinking on the > future of Airflow and AIPs. See the threa

Re: [VOTE] AIP-67 Multi-team deployment of Airflow components

+1 binding. Excited to see this happen! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Sat, Apr 20, 2024 at 12:11 AM Igor Kholopov wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Great to see this happening, hope we will see more proposals towards making > Airflow more flexible! > > Regards, > Igor

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on April 16, 2024

+1 non binding Tested few example DAGs with cncf. Works fine. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 at 12:21 PM, Pankaj Koti wrote: > +1 (non-binding) Concurring with Wei. > > > Best regards, > > *Pankaj Koti* > Senior Software Engineer (Airflow OSS Eng

Re: [PROPOSAL] Keep >= LATEST MINOR for all providers using common.sql provider

use it? That way we would avoid one of the bigger problems which is maintaining the providers that have common.sql as dependency but do not need it as and when we someday deprecate common.sql? Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Sun, Apr 14, 2024 at 2:20 PM Wei Lee wrote: > I

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on April 10, 2024

provider (#38781) - Add ssl context for verification of certs in FTPS hook (#38266) All these changes are working as expected. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 10:53 PM Elad Kalif wrote: > databricks and yandex providers are excluded from rc1. > Please contin

Re: [DISCUSS] Redis licencing changes impact

I too agree with what you are saying, Jarek. I do not think there is any direct dependency here from what I know so far. Looking forward to when someone adds Valkey support. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 10:06 PM Vikram Koka wrote: > Agree with your assessmen

Re: Issues on the Airflow Slack Workspace

Thanks for your email, Kaxil. I have been facing similar issues as well. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 at 9:45 PM, Kaxil Naik wrote: > Hi all, > > I wanted to let you all know that I am facing & aware that others like me > are facing issues with Airfl

Re: [DISCUSS] Asynchronous SQLAlchemy

Thanks, Hussein and Ash, I am much clearer on the scope now and I am ok with the discussion going on in the thread so far. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 2:25 AM Andrey Anshin wrote: > If I do not miss something, usage of DB is not covered by Airflow Public >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New committer: Wei Lee

Many congratulations, Wei! Welcome onboard! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 at 2:26 PM, Jarek Potiuk wrote: > Congrats Wei! Indeed, well deserved! > > On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 10:54 AM Hussein Awala wrote: > > > Congrats Wei, well deserved! > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Asynchronous SQLAlchemy

in the long term? Looking forward to improvements async can bring in! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Sun, Apr 7, 2024 at 3:13 AM Hussein Awala wrote: > The Metadata Database is the brain of Airflow, where all scheduling > decisions, cross-communication, synchronization between

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.0 from 2.9.0rc3

+1 (non binding) I was able to install the RC seamlessly and ran a few example DAGs along with a few random UI testing. Looks good! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 9:38 AM Jed Cunningham wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Checked reproducibility, signatures, checks

Re: [DISCUSS] Consider disabling self-hosted runners for commiter PRs

+1 I like the idea. Looking forward to seeing the difference. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 3:54 AM Ferruzzi, Dennis wrote: > Interested in seeing the difference, +1 > > > - ferruzzi > > > > From: Oliveira, N

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.0 from 2.9.0rc2

+1 non binding Tested a few example DAGs and tested to see if my changes work as expected. It looks good to me. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 4:04 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > +1 (binding) - checked reproducibility, signatures, checksums, licences - > > all go

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.0 from 2.9.0rc1

-candidate-by-contributors Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 10:01 AM Amogh Desai wrote: > +1 non binding > > Installed the RC with pip and ran it with breeze. > > Tested out a few example dags from my test suite and also checked if my > changes > work as

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.0 from 2.9.0rc1

+1 non binding Installed the RC with pip and ran it with breeze. Tested out a few example dags from my test suite and also checked if my changes work as expected. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 1:46 PM Ephraim Anierobi wrote: > Hey fellow Airflowers, > &g

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal for adding Telemetry via Scarf

+1 looks like a good tool which could be super helpful. * We should have some transparency into the data that is collected or sent * We should have an option to optionally opt-out Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 7:53 AM Wei Lee wrote: > +1 to this. It would be

Re: [VOTE] AIP-64: Keep TaskInstance try history

+1 binding I like the thought behind this and understand why this was repeatedly asked by the community. Good work on the proposal so far! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 9:58 AM Rahul Vats wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Regards, > Rahul Vats > 9953

Re: [VOTE] March 2024 PR of the Month

My vote goes to #36755 Great teamwork, given that it wasn't so easy since so many providers were involved. Kudos! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 5:46 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > +1 on Python 3.12 (#36755) - with the note that it's been a joint effort > of q

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on March 25, 2024

along with Airflow 2.9.0rc11* Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 10:34 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > +1 (binding): checked signatures, checksums, licences, reproducibility. > > I build latest main `airflow` (that will become b2) as `2.9.0rc1` package > and insta

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.8.4 from 2.8.4rc1

+1 non binding Verified my changes, and ran a few example DAGs. I see no regressions. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 8:11 PM Andrey Anshin wrote: > +1 binding > > Checked files, licences, signatures and also my changes. > > One small nit that I've fo

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Airflow Helm Chart 1.13.1 based on 1.13.1rc1

+1 non binding Tested the chart bundle on a kind cluster, and things seem to work as expected. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 3:03 AM Hussein Awala wrote: > +1 (binding) Checked signatures, licences, and checksums, and tested the > chart locally

Re: [DISCUSS] Applying D105 rule for our codebase ("undocumented magic methods") ?

cases being handled separately. Thanks & Best Regards, Amogh Desai On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 11:46 PM Oliveira, Niko wrote: > I'm -1 to enabling D105 > > > I don't think it will lead to helpful documentation. I think for the rare > cases it is required it can left up to the develo

Re: [DISCUSS] DRAFT AIP-67 Multi-tenant deployment of Airflow components

Thanks Jarek and Shubham for the clarifications. Looking forward to this one! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 10:10 AM Mehta, Shubham wrote: > Jarek - I totally agree. We had a similar conversation in Dec 2022, and > Filip K. from Google suggested [1] ca

Re: [DISCUSS] DRAFT AIP-67 Multi-tenant deployment of Airflow components

would be overwhelming and impractical Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 5:52 AM Adam Dutko wrote: > Shubham, > > I typically lurk on this list. I find your example of [Rocket] and J's > request for more voices a good opportunity to speak up. > > As a platfo

Re: [VOTE] AIP-59 Performance testing framework

+1 binding Glad to see this happen. Go for it! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 12:28 AM Rahul Vats wrote: > +1 (non- binding) > > On Tue, 12 Mar, 2024, 23:40 Bartosz Jankiewicz, > wrote: > > > Hi folks, > > > > The AIP for p

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.8.3 from 2.8.3rc1

+1 non binding. Installed and ran some example DAGs. All looks good. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 8:31 PM Vincent Beck wrote: > +1 non binding. I check my change and it works as expected. I also ran few > testing DAGs and they ran fine. > > On 2024/03/0

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on March 04, 2024

+1 non binding Verified some dags, mostly around cncf providers. Looks good  On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 at 11:13 AM, Rahul Vats wrote: > +1 (non-binding). > > Verified running example DAG for below provides with no issues > > >- https://pypi.org/project/apache-airflow-providers-amazon/8.19.0rc1 >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Airflow Helm Chart 1.13.0 based on 1.13.0rc1

+1 non binding. Installed the helm chart in a test cluster, played around a bit and ran some example DAGs. Looks good! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Sun, Mar 3, 2024 at 8:29 PM Ephraim Anierobi wrote: > +1 (binding). > Installed the chart and ran a few dags in kind cluster.

Re: [VOTE] January 2024 PR of the Month

+1 for #37101 too! This will make datasets more usable and it is a step in the right direction! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 7:00 AM Wei Lee wrote: > +1 for #37101 > > Best, > Wei > > Kenten Danas 於 2024年2月27日 週二 上午5:28寫道： > > > +1

Re: [DISCUSS] Considering trying out uv for our CI workflows

Thanks for the superb investigation and effort @Jarek Potiuk ! I quite like the performance improvement numbers uv brings in compared to pip. I see no reason not to switch to UV in prod images as well. I will take a look at the pull request soon. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Mon, Fe

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.8.2 from 2.8.2rc3

+1 non binding Tested my contributions along with a few general DAGs. Things don't seem to have digressed. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 1:57 AM Scheffler Jens (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > Tested the PRs I contributed as fixes and can c

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.8.2 from 2.8.2rc2

+1 non binding Installed the RC with pip and tested few dags using `airflow standalone` and also verified my changes Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 1:55 PM Ephraim Anierobi wrote: > Hey fellow Airflowers, > > I have cut Airflow 2.8.2rc2. This email is c

Re: [DISCUSS] Considering trying out uv for our CI workflows

I agree with Niko here. If someone is willing to give it a try, we should enable it experimentally and give it a stint for a couple of weeks. If we see significant results, we can adopt it. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 3:32 AM Oliveira, Niko wrote: > The Astra

Re: [DISCUSS] Considering trying out uv for our CI workflows

I am not having any strong objections to any of the decision take here, solely because this won't be an user facing change On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 7:07 AM Alexander Shorin wrote: > I share Andrey's skepticism. It's just yet another tool which has an > unclear development strategy. Should you

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on February 19, 2024

+1 non binding On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 at 4:29 PM, Phani Kumar wrote: > +1 non-binding. > > On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 4:15 PM Pankaj Singh > wrote: > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > Tested my changes. looking good. Thanks for the RC's and testing it. > > > > On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 4:01 PM Pankaj Koti

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on February 17, 2024

+1 non binding On Sun, 18 Feb 2024 at 9:37 AM, Wei Lee wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Tested both providers with our example DAGs without encountering an error. > Verified #36330 > Best, > > Wei > > > > On Feb 17, 2024, at 5:51 PM, ayaan rayan >

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on February 12, 2024

- 0 (non binding) due to https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37279 for the CNCF provider +1 (non binding) for the rest On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 5:34 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > +1 (binding), checked signatures, checksums, licences, reproducibility. > Checked all my changes are present in the

Re: [DISCUSS] Rename channels on slack

ust #first-pr Or maybe someone can propose a better name for #contributing that is less > ambiguous? > What do you all think of #dev-support? This reason the confusion arises is because #contributing can translate to many meanings. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at

Re: [VOTE] Add the ability to report slack messages that don't meet code of conduct

I was trying on a rough POC but it looks like I need to deploy my application against a webserver on the internet. I also do not have the access to create a private channel on Airflow Slack. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 9:43 AM Amogh Desai wrote: > Thank

Re: [VOTE] Add the ability to report slack messages that don't meet code of conduct

Thank you, I will try to work on some POC soon On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 10:47 PM Briana Okyere wrote: > Would love your help on this Amogh! > > On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 9:40 PM Amogh Desai > wrote: > > > Let us try to summarise and see what the bot has to do. Summarising:

Re: [VOTE] "Require conversation resolution" setting in PRs as permanent solution

Love the vote from @Jed Cunningham here! On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 3:05 AM Jed Cunningham wrote: > -0.5 >

Re: [VOTE] Add the ability to report slack messages that don't meet code of conduct

the people in that channel so that they can be contacted privately too Havent deployed a bot ever, but would be willing to try Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 12:58 AM Briana Okyere wrote: > I agree with the bot idea- does anyone on this thread have the ability to >

Re: [VOTE] "Require conversation resolution" setting in PRs as permanent solution

+1 from me too based on my earlier points. Wondering if we can make it a little more rigid to address the concerns about hiding comments from the email thread earlier Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 7:47 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > Hello, > > We have be

Re: Idea for Discussion: custom TI dependencies

they upgrade to. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 5:58 AM Xiaodong (XD) DENG wrote: > Hi Jens, > > Many thanks for the feedback. > > I fully agree on the potential performance impact if the custom dependency > is not written in the ideal way, and tha

Re: [VOTE] Add the ability to report slack messages that don't meet code of conduct

action. (Might be an overkill, but thinking out loud here) Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Sat, Feb 3, 2024 at 2:55 AM Briana Okyere wrote: > Hey All, > > I'm breaking this out into another conversation because I think it warrants > its own decision before we move forward.

Re: [VOTE] AIP 61 - Hybrid Executors

+1 binding Good work on the proposal, Niko. The most important part of this vote for me is the scoping you have done. Great work on that! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 12:12 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > +1 (binding) . I think we know the scope (more importantly

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Starting experimenting with "Require conversation resolution" setting

with this overall and my vote will be a +1 Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 7:56 PM Aritra Basu wrote: > I personally haven't had too much friction due to the change and it has > helped me keep track of any comments people have made. I remain +1 to the >

Re: [PROPOSE] Add A Code of Conduct for Slack and Meetups

This is great, @Briana Okyere Thank you for bringing this up. Reviewed the document and left a few comments On Sat, Jan 27, 2024 at 12:36 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > I think the best would be where there is a committee to discuss and decide > (usually), but the people who are in the committee

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on January 26, 2024

+1 non binding No regressions from the last rc. On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 at 2:02 PM, Elad Kalif wrote: > +1 (binding) > > > On Sat, Jan 27, 2024 at 2:08 AM Hussein Awala wrote: > > > +1 (binding) I did the same tests and checks as for the first RC. > > > > On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 5:28 PM Jarek

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on January 22, 2024

+1 non binding Tested some example dags in CNCF provider and Hive Provider. Looks good! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 8:44 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > +1 (binding) - tested my changes, checked binary reproducibility, licences, > signatures, checksums - all

Re: [VOTE] January 2024 PR of the Month

and dedication of the author) Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 3:21 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > Heck, why not. I will shamelessly vote on my #36537. While it took just a > few weeks to merge, It leapfrogged our legacy packaging setup to > more-or-less bleeding e

Re: [VOTE] Accept AIP-60 (Standard URI representation for Airflow Datasets)

+1 non binding On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 11:04 PM Oliveira, Niko wrote: > +1 (binding) > > > From: Wei Lee > Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2024 5:24:54 PM > To: dev@airflow.apache.org > Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] [COURRIEL EXTERNE] [VOTE] Accept AIP-60 (Standard > URI

Re: What goes into the next release (was [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.8.1 from 2.8.1rc1)

while it gained only the "super >> important" information IMHO. So yeah having a separate FAQ taking my mail >> as context might be a good idea. >> >> I will open PR for that and if others agree it's a good idea (and help >> with reviewing it, we can merge i

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.8.1 from 2.8.1rc1

+1 non binding Installed the RC with helm charts, tried a couple of installation configurations and ran a few examples, not seeing any regression. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 12:16 AM Jed Cunningham wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Checked signatures, checks

Re: What goes into the next release (was [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.8.1 from 2.8.1rc1)

. One suggestion: what if we put it together in a document and put it on the airflow website under https://airflow.apache.org/community/ where we mention "how we release"? Might be a bit too much given the context people will have while visiting the airflow website.. Thanks & Regard

Re: [VOTE] New Airflow Community Provider: Teradata

This is good stuff! +1 non binding Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 9:31 AM Abhishek Bhakat wrote: > +1 non binding > > > On 17-Jan-2024, at 03:01, Aritra Basu wrote: > > > > +1 non binding > > > > -- > > Regards, > > A

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Andrey Anshin (taragolis)

Congrats Andrey!! On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 at 12:08 AM, Hussein Awala wrote: > Congratulations Andrey, very well deserved! > > On Mon 15 Jan 2024 at 19:35, Jarek Potiuk wrote: > > > I have the pleasure to announce that The Project Management Committee > > (PMC) for Apache Airflow has invited Andrey

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on January 07, 2024

+1 non binding Tested few changes around cncf provider. No regressions On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 at 8:36 PM, Pankaj Koti wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Concurring with Rahul and Wei! > > On Mon, 8 Jan 2024, 18:55 Rahul Vats, wrote: > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > In addition to providers mentioned

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Looking for potential new security team members

e criteria here. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Sat, Jan 6, 2024 at 2:14 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > * we have to know the candidate - they have to be either a committer > or someone who has contributed a lot and we know who the person is. > Stakeholders and community members tha

Re: [PROPOSAL] let's update the community content on the landing pages

/community about the same. One way to avoid the non vendor neutrality problem would be to keep this (future) team/role have one / two members from various stakeholders. Thanks for bringing this up, Michael. Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 5:21 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote: &g

Re: [VOTE] December PR of the Month

My vote goes to #35719. Having a nice UI fix come in, that too from a first time contributor makes it a winner for me! Thanks & Regards, Amogh Desai On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 7:51 AM Wei Lee wrote: > I want to vote for https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35926, and > thank Jarek fo

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on December 31, 2023

+1 non binding Tested if the RC is fine with other providers. Things look good  On Sun, 31 Dec 2023 at 10:01 PM, Phani Kumar wrote: > +1 non binding. > > On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 9:48 PM Hussein Awala wrote: > > > +1 (binding) > > > > On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 5:14 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > > >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Starting experimenting with "Require conversation resolution" setting

Wooho! Looking to see how this turns out for airflow  On Sat, 30 Dec 2023 at 1:35 PM, Jarek Potiuk wrote: > Hello everyone, > > As discussed in > https://lists.apache.org/thread/cs6mcvpn2lk9w2p4oz43t20z3fg5nl7l I just > enabled "require conversation resolution" for our main/stable branches. We

  1   2   >