Re: Operator Templating in Airflow 3

+1 for this change! I especially had lots of trouble with template files with templated filenames and this would solve it. Few comments/questions: "improved debuggability when things go wrong": Could you elaborate on how this proposal improves debuggability? "better discoverability of whether a

Re: [VOTE] May 2024 PR of the Month

My vote goes to PR #39336 since the PR touches many parts of Airflow’s core code. Bas > On 29 May 2024, at 05:09, Phani Kumar > wrote: > > Great contributions from everyone. Thanks Daniel for clean up with #39336, > and thank you Kaxil for leading the scarf discussion, I'm looking forward

Re: [VOTE] Remove experimental API

-1 for me too. Regardless of how we treat the “experimental” status, I often still see people using the experimental API for triggering DAGs. IMO it would be too much of a breaking change to remove it in a minor version, so I suggest removing it in Airflow 3. Bas > Op 16 mrt 2024 om 14:24

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New committer: Jens Scheffler

Congratulations Jens! Well deserved! > On 8 Nov 2023, at 09:57, Ash Berlin-Taylor wrote: > > ✨✨徭 > > On 8 November 2023 08:41:42 GMT, Pierre Jeambrun > wrote: >> Congrats Jens! >> >> Le mer. 8 nov. 2023 à 09:40, Pankaj Koti >> a écrit : >> >>> Many congratulations, Jens!!   >>> >>>

Re: [VOTE] May 2023 PR of the Month

My vote goes to https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/27264 (Add Python 3.11 support). Bas > On 26 May 2023, at 18:47, Michael Robinson > wrote: > > Hello all, > > It’s once again time to vote for the PR of the Month. > > With the help of the script in dev/stats, I’ve identified the

Re: [VOTE] November 2022 PR of the Month

+1 for 26457 Bas > On 22 Nov 2022, at 17:31, Jeambrun Pierre wrote: > > Hello, > > I vote for https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/26457 > . Not sure why it wasn't > selected by our heuristic, with 2k additions, 140 comments, 9 participants,

Re: [VOTE] September 2022 PR of the Month

My vote goes to https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/23592 (no more “as dag” needed) > On 27 Sep 2022, at 19:52, Daniel Standish > wrote: > > One vote for https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/26400 >

Re: [DISCUSS] Move "contrib" and all old classes to a separate package

> Not if you add install `airflow[contrib]` - then it won't break. Having to make a change to keep your system working throughout minor versions — to me that’s a breaking change. So as much as we’d like to get rid of the contrib folder, we should really only change that throughout major

Re: Auto-registering of DAGs in DAG file? (no `as dag` needed?)

For me having to add “as dag” is somewhat non-evident. Also, it’s a few less boilerplate characters you have to write which I think is a good thing in this case. Curious on the edge cases in DAG generation as mentioned by Felix, but I like the idea so +1 for me. Bas > On 2 Aug 2022, at

Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecating SLA feature?

Thanks for bringing this up. I agree SLAs have been broken forever and try to stay away from them. However, I do see people trying to use them (not knowing it's broken). While I appreciate the effort others have made to build a system around Airflow for correct SLA alerting, I think Airflow is

Re: Missing "start_date" or why must a DAG have one

tiuk <mailto:ja...@potiuk.com>> wrote: > Coincidentally - this discussion in Github Discussions started just now has a > clear use cases when omitting start_date makes perfect sense: > https://github.com/apache/airflow/discussions/23594 > <https://github.com/apac

Re: Missing "start_date" or why must a DAG have one

I never understood the requirement for start_date — 99% of the use cases simply want to start from the time the DAG is first added and do not explicitly need to start on a certain date. There is certainly a use case for start_date, but defaulting to None would make more sense IMO, and we could

Re: Simplifying the timetable interface

Hi Malthe, I’m all for simplifying the timetable interface. I think currently Timetables require a deep understanding of Airflow’s scheduling semantics which is way too complex for any Airflow user, plus decisions around e.g. catchup must be implemented which I feel should be generic to all

Re: [DISCUSS] how to name classes with abbreviations?

Thanks for opening this discussion, hopefully we can improve consistency, regardless the outcome. +1 for capitalizing abbreviations. IMO since abbreviations are written capitalised in human language, using the same convention in code gives clarity. Bas > On 4 Feb 2022, at 07:26, Felix

Re: [DISCUSS] deprecate `days_ago` dates utility

Regardless the behaviour of days_ago(), a lot of people use it so we’ll definitely need to document it well with some good examples of alternatives. That said, I think the usage of days_ago() is actually a side-effect of users that don’t really need their DAGs to start at X days ago, but want

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removal of Python2 "virtualenv" support in Airlfow 2.3 ?

+1 for removing it. Had a think whether removing the Python 2 binaries in Airflow 2.3 is right, or if we should first explicitly state the future removal. Since Python 2 has been EOL for a long time + we've advised Python 3 in the docs for a long time + users can still use Python 2 by

Re: [VOTE] AIP-42 Dynamic Task Mapping

+1 (binding) > On 19 Nov 2021, at 18:08, Andrew Godwin > wrote: > > +1 (non-binding) > > On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 2:17 PM Xinbin Huang > wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 1:08 PM Josh Fell > wrote: > +1 (non-binding) Very exciting > > On Thu,

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.2.0 from 2.2.0rc1

+1 non-binding > On 11 Oct 2021, at 08:47, Kaxil Naik wrote: > > A gentle reminder to test and vote on 2.2.0rc1 > > On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 9:37 PM Jarek Potiuk > wrote: > Whoa! > > On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 5:55 PM Vikram Koka > wrote: > > > > Thanks Jed, this is a

Re: New Committers: Jed Cunningham & Tzu-ping Chung

Congrats both Jed & Tzu-ping! Cheers, Bas On 29 Jun 2021, at 03:48, Jiajie Zhong mailto:zhongjiajie...@hotmail.com>> wrote: Congratulations Jed and Tzu-ping! Best Wish — Jiajie

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

+1 (binding) On 4 Mar 2021, at 00:45, Tomasz Urbaszek mailto:turbas...@apache.org>> wrote: +1 (binding). Amazing work! On Wed, 3 Mar 2021 at 22:23, Euccas Chen mailto:euccas.c...@gmail.com>> wrote: +1 (non-binding) On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 11:23 AM Xinbin Huang mailto:bin.huan...@gmail.com>>

Re: Production images for Helm chart - question if we are doing the right thing ?

I could give my own opinion about this thing, but is there nobody at Apache that can answer this question? Bas > On 7 Jun 2020, at 20:09, Philippe Gagnon wrote: > > Hello Jarek, > > Since they are clearly marked as alpha releases I think this is okay. Just > my opinion though. > > Regards,

Re: [VOTE] Naming of the transfer operators/Hooks

#1 -> XToYOperator > On 30 May 2020, at 12:09, Ash Berlin-Taylor wrote: > > +1 for [1] XToYOperator > > On May 30 2020, at 10:03 am, Jarek Potiuk wrote: > >> Seems this one will be easier to settle, there is not much controversy :) >> Following the discussion >>

Re: [DISCUSS] Naming of the transfer operators/Hooks

#1 for me, to me the “To” in the name already implies a transfer between two systems. Bas > On 29 May 2020, at 21:27, Xinbin Huang wrote: > > I also vote [1]: S3ToHiveOperator > > Since there is no such concept on Airflow about transfer operators, we > better not introduce extra complexity

Re: API spec: format of dagrun conf parameter: JSON-encoded string, or JSON object

Option 2 - IMO it’s the path of least surprise. Also, having to encode JSON as string can be cumbersome. Supporting both options is a really no-no to me. Bas > On 29 May 2020, at 08:40, Jarek Potiuk wrote: > > After giving it quite some time to try and think about it this morning, and >

Re: Support for multiple cron expressions

I think this is a very valid use case, so +1 from me. The code logic is IMO pretty straight-forward: take the min(expr1, expr2, expr3, …) to compute the next interval. From the human point of view, it might become complex as Jarek says, but that’s up to the developer. And also: a “helper” view

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Backport Providers 2020.5.20rc3

Thanks for the compliment but I’m no PMC so here’s my non-binding +1 :-) Bas On 26 May 2020, at 22:43, Jarek Potiuk mailto:jarek.pot...@polidea.com>> wrote: Hey all, I have cut Airflow Backport Providers 2020.5.20rc3. This email is calling a vote on the release, which will last for 72 hours -

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Backport Providers 2020.5.20rc2

Busy week, couldn’t check it earlier… 3 comments: (1) First general comment is the split in microsoft providers seems unnecessary to me: * * apache-airflow-backport-providers-microsoft-azure==2020.5.20rc2 * apache-airflow-backport-providers-microsoft-mssql==2020.5.20rc2 *

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

My 2c: adding an option to schedule at the start of an interval is yet another option to take in, adding more complexity. Therefore I’m not in favour of it. The scheduling at start/end has often been a discussed, IMO it's a fact which one has to know when learning Airflow. But not something

Re: [VOTE] Make conn_id unique in Airflow (a.k.a. Remove connection balancing HA )

+1 > On 24 Apr 2020, at 13:28, Jarek Potiuk wrote: > > +1 > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 12:31 PM Ash Berlin-Taylor wrote: > >> As we discussed in the thread on Spec thread for our new API, the idea >> came up of making conn_id unique in Airflow >> >> < >>

Re: API spec questions

Same here, load balancing should be responsibility of the application itself, not Airflow. +1 for making connections unique Bas On 11 Apr 2020, at 11:13, Robin Edwards mailto:r...@bidnamic.com>> wrote: On Sat, 11 Apr 2020, 01:20 QP Hou, mailto:q...@scribd.com>> wrote: It looks like we

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Airflow 1.10.10 based on 1.10.10rc2

+1 Bas > On 4 Apr 2020, at 19:12, Tomasz Urbaszek wrote: > > Thanks Ash! I forgot about that. > > Tested on py3.6 + postgres, created user, run scheduler and webserver, > run a few gcp example dags (using backports). > > +1 (non-binding) > > T. > > > On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 6:59 PM Ash

Re: [VOTE] AIP-33 Secrets Backend

+1 > On 16 Mar 2020, at 12:27, Ash Berlin-Taylor wrote: > > +1 binding > > On Mar 16 2020, at 11:20 am, Kaxil Naik wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 11:19 AM Jarek Potiuk >> wrote: >> >>> Clarify: +1 (binding) >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 12:19 PM Jarek Potiuk

Re: [Final review] Airflow website + need your input to the web copy

I really like it (including front page animation)! Looks fresh & modern. There’s still some placeholders here and there so I won’t comment on those. Some notes on the parts that are filled: - would also put the slack invite page in the “join the community” - the menu on the right side in the

Re: Inconsistent class names for AWS integrations

Hi, How about the following conventions? * No AWS in whatever notation in the class name, since this is already in the module (airflow.providers.aws….) * Only exception to above is the AwsHook, which is a “base” hook which most other hooks inherit from * No “Transfer” in class

Re: AIP-21 (Move operators to Core) - "cross_transfer" packages

1. Sounds good to me 2. Also fine 3. We should have some consensus here. E.g. I’m not sure what groups “fundamentals” and “software” are meant to be :-) While we’re at it: we should really move the BaseOperator out of models. The BaseOperator has no representation in the DB and should

Re: [PROPOSE] Ease future migration path to 2.0 by provider's operators/hook backporting to 1.10.*

Hi Jarek, I definitely see a future in creating separate installable packages for various operators/hooks/etc (as in AIP-8). This would IMO strip the “core” Airflow to only what’s needed and result in a small package without a ton of dependencies (and make it more maintainable, shorter tests,

Re: Can an xcom push and pull to the same task instance on the same execution date?

Hi Damian, Currently XComs cannot be shared between instances of the same task (i.e. retries/sensors). This is because XComs of a task instance are cleared when rerunning the same task instance. Don’t know why that choice was made, but this PR: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/6370 was

Re: New PMC Member: Jarek Potiuk

Congrats Jarek, well deserved! Bas > On 20 Oct 2019, at 19:06, Karolina Rosół wrote: > > Congrats Jarek! You've absolutely earned it. So happy for you :-) > > Karolina Rosół > Polidea | Project Manager > > M: +48 606 630 236 <+48606630236> > E:

Re: [PROPOSAL] Migrate to Pytest

Big +1 for pytest Bas > On 14 Oct 2019, at 15:29, Jarek Potiuk wrote: > > Fantastic! Pytest is sooo much better than nosetests! > > On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 1:44 PM Ash Berlin-Taylor wrote: > >> Awesome, thanks! >> >> I tried this at the start of the year but we were a few 100 failing tests

Re: [VOTE] Change the Airflow logo

Option 1 On 21 Aug 2019, at 15:08, raman gupta mailto:ramandu...@gmail.com>> wrote: Option 2. Thanks, Raman Gupta On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 6:26 PM Vardan Gupta mailto:vardangupta...@gmail.com>> wrote: Option 1 On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 6:18 PM Mohannad Albanayosy

Re: Outage report

Nice work! Always love reading these sort of “bug reports from hell” and the work required to find the cause. Also strongly agree we should standardize hooks in some way. Cheers, Bas > On 16 Aug 2019, at 17:52, Shaw, Damian P. > wrote: > > Thanks, this is really useful to know! I often

Re: [DISCUSS] Tweaks to the Airflow logo

I like it! Looks modern and finally that annoying stain is gone. Bas On 2019/08/13 10:28:48, Ash Berlin-Taylor wrote: > Hi everyone,> > > Here at Astronomer we've just had our Lead Designer, Chris Hendrixson, join > us recently and he's proposed a few subtle tweaks to the Airflow logo that

Re: [2.0 spring cleaning] Remove `dag >> task`?

Big +1 on removing lesser known and confusing options and streamlining the way to use Airflow. Bas > On 3 Jul 2019, at 22:28, Felix Uellendall wrote: > > Definitly +1 for removing this whatever this is supposed to mean :D > > -feluelle > Original Message > On Jul 3, 2019,

Re: AIP-22: Group ORM models by their logical usage instead of type

om-written DAGs have to be corrected. I think this is yet another > argument to keep at least the old __init__ and import the classes from > their new locations still keeping the old 'models' package - even if we > decide to move them. And then it might turn out the change will be fully > b

Re: I have joined Astronomer full-time !!

Congrats Kaxil on both events! Bas On 22 Jun 2019, at 11:53, Felix Uellendall mailto:felix.uellend...@protonmail.com.INVALID>> wrote: Congrats Kaxil :) Am 22/06/2019 um 08:23 schrieb Driesprong, Fokko: Awesome news! Congrats on the move and enjoy your wedding! :-) Cheers, Fokko Op za 22

Re: CLI: Use nested commands instead of flags

My 2c: I googled a bit and checked a few other CLIs. The internet is full of people discussing this topic and there is no straight answer, so pick one and stick with it. Most CLIs seem to use both plural and singular, depending on whether you’re making a request to single resource or multiple

Re: [VOTE] AIP-16: CLI: Use nested commands instead of flags

+1 (binding) On 11 Jun 2019, at 18:59, Tao Feng mailto:fengta...@gmail.com>> wrote: +1 (binding) On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 4:15 AM Ash Berlin-Taylor mailto:a...@apache.org>> wrote: Hi Airflowers, This email calls for a vote to introduce restructure the CLI to use nested commands instead of

Does anybody deploy DAGs in zip files?

General question: does anybody deploy their DAGs inside zip files? I understand this functionality exists for historical reasons, but I’ve never heard of anybody actually using it. If there’s nobody, I think the DAG parsing could be simplified by removing this functionality. If there is

Re: Proposal: Create epics on the airflow ASF jira

Would be great to have epics. Fokko has previously created a few issues with sub-issues, that also helps organisation. Bas > On 13 May 2019, at 20:49, Daniel Imberman wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > I've been working on cleaning up the backlog of tickets for airflow, and > I'm running into an

Re: Schedule interval options

Yea that’s why I also suggested 2-6. If that does not work for you, could you explain the use case? Bas > On 9 May 2019, at 22:00, James Coder wrote: > > Yes, but doing 1-5 would not run 5 until 1. > > James Coder > >> On May 9, 2019, at 2:40 PM, Bas Harenslak

Re: [DISCUSS] AIRFLOW-4192 - remove duplicate/obsolete/derived task context variables

les such as something_start and something_end https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/31423aa7feba421c53356a1e566f777c7a7973966c3320611286a2fb@%3Cdev.airflow.apache.org%3E Cheers, Fokko Op do 11 apr. 2019 om 08:44 schreef Bas Harenslak < basharens...@godatadriven.com>: Great discussion, let’s stay on track. If

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Please welcome new Airflow committer Joshua Carp

Congrats! Bas > On 30 Apr 2019, at 03:50, Chen Tong wrote: > > Congrats Joshua! > > Thank you! > Chen Tong > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 9:23 PM Kevin Yang wrote: > >> Congrats Joshua! >> >> Cheers, >> Kevin Y >> >> On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 4:40 PM Deng Xiaodong wrote: >> >>> Congrats

Re: Need more pairs of eyes for the flaky LocalExecutorTest fix

@Fokko I believe that’s implicitly created by multiprocessing.Manager(): ….. The returned manager object corresponds to a spawned child process and …. I’m in favour

Re: [DISCUSS] period_start/period_end instead of execution_date/next_execution_date

dimension for which you only wanted the latest version of the attributes in you backfill. end_date was used for time ranges where several days were processed together in a range to save on compute. I don't see an issue with removing them. Best regards, Arthur On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 5:37 AM

Re: [VOTE] AIP-6 Apply Pylint to Airflow

used to them. >>> >>> Ofc, if someone knows of large projects that successfully use pylint, I'd >>> appreciate learning that my view of the tool is wrong! >>> >>> Thanks for everyone's hard work, >>> Max >>> >>> On 2019/04

Re: Proposal: Directly tie Jira into Github for airflow

Nice one +1 Bas On 17 Apr 2019, at 23:13, Daniel Imberman mailto:dimberman.opensou...@gmail.com>> wrote: Using the Github Jira integration https://github.com/marketplace/jira-software-github we can make it easier to manage/track jira tickets from the PRs. This will make it easier to ensure we

Re: Proposal: Automatically mark stale PRs in github

+1 Bas On 17 Apr 2019, at 23:09, Jarek Potiuk mailto:jarek.pot...@polidea.com>> wrote: +1 Principal Software Engineer Phone: +48660796129 śr., 17 kwi 2019, 23:04 użytkownik Kevin Yang mailto:yrql...@gmail.com>> napisał: +1 Cheers, Kevin Daniel Imberman

Re: [VOTE] AIP-6 Apply Pylint to Airflow

t; kaxiln...@gmail.com : +1 (binding) On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 9:51 PM Jarek Potiuk < jarek.pot...@polidea.com wrote: +1 (non-binding). On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 10:50 PM Bas Harenslak < basharens...@godatadriven.com> wrote: Hello Airflow community, This email calls for a vote to introduce Pylint in t

Re: [DISCUSS] AIRFLOW-4192 - remove duplicate/obsolete/derived task context variables

g_start and something_end https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/31423aa7feba421c53356a1e566f777c7a7973966c3320611286a2fb@%3Cdev.airflow.apache.org%3E Cheers, Fokko Op do 11 apr. 2019 om 08:44 schreef Bas Harenslak < basharens...@godatadriven.com>: Great discussion, let’s stay on track. If I can summarise:

[VOTE] AIP-6 Apply Pylint to Airflow

Hello Airflow community, This email calls for a vote to introduce Pylint in the Airflow project. The vote will last for at least 1 week (April 18th 23:00 CET), and at least three +1 (binding) votes have been cast. After feedback on AIP-6 and discussion on

Re: [DISCUSS] AIRFLOW-4192 - remove duplicate/obsolete/derived task context variables

be it got lost) were a blend of things which were used by a backfill framework used internally at Airbnb. Latest date was used if you needed to join to a dimension for which you only wanted the latest version of the attributes in you backfill. end_date was used for time ranges where several days wer

Re: FAB - New REST API in the works

Which PR is this? > On 8 Apr 2019, at 13:55, danielvazgaspar@ danielvazgas...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Just commited to the PR, FAB_API_SWAGGER_UI = True > will attach a BaseView with SwaggerUI so it's easy to visualize > > On 2019/04/08 09:03:03, danielvazgas...@gmail.com > wrote: >> >> Ok,

Re: Database referral integrity

In my experience it could go either way; in some cases FKs could impair the performance and in some cases FKs can help the query optimizer improve query performance. Each case is different and without testing it’s just guessing. I’m in favour of adding FKs and value referential integrity over

Re: [VOTE] Accept AIP-3: Drop support for Python 2

, I'm happy to inform you all that the vote has been passed! From Airflow 2.0 we will drop support for Python 2 (and this is not an April Fools' joke :-). With a total 18 +1 votes, and a single +0 vote (at least a positive zero) from Ash. With the input of Bas Harenslak, I've composed a non-exha

Re: [VOTE] Accept AIP-3: Drop support for Python 2

+1 (non-binding) On 24 Mar 2019, at 09:07, Andrii Soldatenko mailto:andrii.soldate...@gmail.com>> wrote: +1 (binding) On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 9:24 AM Bolke de Bruin mailto:bdbr...@gmail.com>> wrote: +1, binding Sent from my iPhone On 24 Mar 2019, at 05:26, Deng Xiaodong

Re: Multiple Schedulers - "scheduler_lock"

Peter, The numbers you mention seem to come out of the blue. I think you’re oversimplifying it and cannot simply state 180/36 = 5 minutes. Throwing in numbers without explanation creates confusion. I have some questions when reading your AIP. I have to make lots of assumptions and think

Suggestion for AIP improvement

Hi all, I suggest a new template + guidelines to improve the AIP process. Please let me know what you think (especially the PMCs). >From my point of view, the AIPs have unfortunately been rather useless so far. >There are currently 17 AIPs and not one of them has led to constructive >changes

[DISCUSS] AIP-14 Create composable operators using common interfaces

The idea of composable operators with hooks adhering to a common interface has popped up on several occasions. I explain the idea in detail in AIP-14: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/AIP-14+Create+composable+operators+using+common+interfaces. Let’s discuss if and how to

Re: [DISCUSS] AIP-3: Drop Python2 support in Airflow 2.0

for showing deprecation warnings. I didn’t want to re-invent the wheel and used a tiny package for it. More details are in the PR itself. If you know a better way to do this, let me know :-) Bas On 17 Feb 2019, at 09:00, Bas Harenslak mailto:basharens...@godatadriven.com>> wrote: The PR co

[DISCUSS] AIP-12 Persist DAG into DB

Let's discuss AIP-12 here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/AIP-12+Persist+DAG+into+DB. It involves persisting the entire DAG into the metastore. For full details, please read the AIP. A PR was made to create “versioned graphs” given by option #3 in the AIP:

Re: [VOTE] Accept AIP-13: OpenAPI 3 based API definition

A solid API is much needed. Following a standard and using the OpenAPI spec makes everybody's life easier. +1 Bas On 21 Feb 2019, at 18:28, Ash Berlin-Taylor mailto:a...@apache.org>> wrote: Dear Airflow community, This email calls for a vote to accept Airflow Improvement Proposal 13:

Re: [DISCUSS] AIP-3: Drop Python2 support in Airflow 2.0

The PR comments say drop hdfs3 and use pyarrow, however this is not implemented yet. > On 17 Feb 2019, at 08:42, zhong jiajie wrote: > > I overlook the PR https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/3560 still use > **hdfs3** rather than **PyArrow**. So which package we choice finilly? >

Re: Get a Head Start for Contributing to the Airflow Project

Check out the Airflow JIRA for open issues -> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/AIRFLOW. Read CONTRIBUTING.md Documentation is always an easy way to get started contributing. Or anything that you’re missing in Airflow yourself. Cheers, Bas On 24 Jan 2019, at 16:43, Gimhana Nadeeshan

Re: AIP-6: Enforce the usage of a code formatter

ver, code formatter can be a positive change. >> >> Regards, >> Kaxil >> >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 30, 2018, 12:12 Bas Harenslak > wrote: >> >>> Wanted to point out I created an Airflow AIP for introducing a code >>> formatter: >&g

Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate KnownEvent/KnownEventType

+1 > On 2 Jan 2019, at 22:42, Daniel Imberman wrote: > > +1 > > On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 1:18 PM Maxime Beauchemin > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 1:00 PM Dan Davydov >> wrote: >> >>> +1 to removing >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 10:48 PM Driesprong, Fokko >>> wrote: >>>

AIP-6: Enforce the usage of a code formatter

Wanted to point out I created an Airflow AIP for introducing a code formatter: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/AIP-6+Enforce+the+usage+of+a+code+formatter. I created an AIP since enforcing a code formatter will make a large number of changes and result in a few PR conflicts.