Merged :)
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 3:37 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
>
> Approved
>
> On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 13:53, Jarek Potiuk wrote:
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/24704 - PR here
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 11:01 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
>> >
>> > OK. I see no opposition. I will
Approved
On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 13:53, Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/24704 - PR here
>
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 11:01 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> >
> > OK. I see no opposition. I will remove it :)
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 8:23 AM Tobiasz Kędzierski
> >
https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/24704 - PR here
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 11:01 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
>
> OK. I see no opposition. I will remove it :)
>
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 8:23 AM Tobiasz Kędzierski
> wrote:
> >
> > +1 for removing (non-binding).
> >
> > wt., 28 cze 2022 o 00:13
+1 for removing (non-binding).
wt., 28 cze 2022 o 00:13 Jed Cunningham
napisał(a):
> +1 for removing it.
>
+1 for removing it.
Yeah, I'd agree that it is just noise.
From: Daniel Standish
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2022 10:25 AM
To: dev@airflow.apache.org
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL][PROPOSAL] Remove "Label when reviewed" workflow
CAUTION: This email originated fr
Ah yes I think I fully tune out that one "pr likely to ... this or
that...". No concerns with chopping.
Re up-to-date checker... re migrations ... yeah now with the migration
reference automated in pre-commit, we always have a conflict in outstanding
PRs with migrations when another is merged;
And Daniel - the Up-to-date checker actually **is** sometimes useful -
this was particularly useful when we had two people adding new
migrations of sqlalchemy resulting in two heads.
Maybe after the recent changes in naming/sequential migration numbers
it is actually not something that is likely
This is the one that produces those bot comments)
> The PR is likely OK to be merged with just subset of tests for
default Python and Database
versions without running the full matrix of tests, because it does not
modify the core of
Airflow. If the committers decide that the full tests matrix is
I never noticed this one but on the topic of useless CI checks
Up-to-date checker seems like a strong candidate for removal for similar
reasons.
On Sat, Jun 25, 2022 at 2:26 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I think this workflow we have in CI is rather useless now.
> It has been
Hey all,
I think this workflow we have in CI is rather useless now.
It has been somewhat useful at some point in the past when we tried to
automate CI checks and see if we can get more info if the PR needs
more thorough check (i.e. whether it touches core airflow, or whether
it requires "full
11 matches
Mail list logo
