Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on April 13, 2022

2022-04-22 Thread Kamil BreguĊ‚a
+1 binding On Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 01:33 Kaxil Naik wrote: > +1 binding > > On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 at 07:39, Elad Kalif wrote: > >> +1 binding >> >> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 9:35 PM Jed Cunningham >> wrote: >> >>> +1 (binding) >>> >>> Checked signatures, checksums, and licences >>> >>

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on April 13, 2022

2022-04-21 Thread Kaxil Naik
+1 binding On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 at 07:39, Elad Kalif wrote: > +1 binding > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 9:35 PM Jed Cunningham > wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> Checked signatures, checksums, and licences >> >

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on April 13, 2022

2022-04-21 Thread Elad Kalif
+1 binding On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 9:35 PM Jed Cunningham wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Checked signatures, checksums, and licences >

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on April 13, 2022

2022-04-20 Thread Jed Cunningham
+1 (binding) Checked signatures, checksums, and licences

Re: [VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on April 13, 2022

2022-04-20 Thread Jarek Potiuk
Just a short reminder - the databricks provider has been tested already so I need 2 +1s from PMC members :) (till Friday). On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 12:48 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > > Hey all, > > I just noticed that I added a wrong subject when I sent the email - > just before Easter (for

[VOTE] Airflow Providers prepared on April 13, 2022

2022-04-19 Thread Jarek Potiuk
Hey all, I just noticed that I added a wrong subject when I sent the email - just before Easter (for Databricks RC2). So once I am back - to fulfill all the requirements. I am resending it with the proper [VOTE] subject. I have cut the Airflow Providers Databricks RC2 package for release. This