Hi all,
Here are the notes from our Airflow 2.0 dev call earlier yesterday. Thank
you all who joined the call.
Here is a quick summary of the call.
- *Airflow 2.0*
- If the vote succeeds, Airflow 2.0 will be released on Thursday, 17
December
- *Provider 1.0.0 *
- Apache
Hello everyone,
After releasing PIP 20.3.3 today we were able to make 2.0 compatible with
the new PIP and 1.10.14 almost works (papermill extra is problematic when
installing airflow using the new PIP). We will try to address it in case we
release 1.10.15 but if you want to install papermill extra
*pip install --upgrade pip==20.2.4 *
On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 1:28 PM Jarek Potiuk
wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Just to remind everyone - there is an ongoing issue with the new resolver
> in PIP 20.3 that breaks Airflow installation.
>
> The only officially supported version of PIP to install a
Hello everyone,
Just to remind everyone - there is an ongoing issue with the new resolver
in PIP 20.3 that breaks Airflow installation.
The only officially supported version of PIP to install airflow is 20.2.4
and you are strongly advised to downgrade to this version before attempting
to install
Hi all,
Here are the notes from our Airflow 2.0 dev call earlier today. Thank you
all who joined the call.
To all those who attended, can you please double-check and add if I missed
something?
To those who did not join, please voice your opinion if you disagree with
anything in the summary or
Hi all,
I would like to remind whoever is interested in helping in Airflow 2.0
Release process that we will have our weekly developer call today:
*Airflow 2.0 Dev Call Calendar Link*:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=c_dhdh3bdjc42c4ngtnpg7ovcs9g%40group.calendar.google.com&
HEy Everyone,
I created '2.0' milestone for all those things that can be done after
actual RC release - and I review remaining RC issues and move such issues
there.
J.
On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:55 AM Vikram Koka wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Here are the notes from our Airflow 2
d always when you install airflow:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While they are separated out as providers (and can be downgraded or
>>>>>>> upgraded independently, we will make them "required" dependencies,so
>&
;>
>>>>>>>>> While they are separated out as providers (and can be downgraded or
>>>>>>>>> upgraded independently, we will make them "required" dependencies,so
>>>>>>>>> anyone who uses airflow using PIP
independently, we will make them "required" dependencies,so
>>>>>> anyone
>>>>>> who uses airflow using PIP will have those providers installed by
>>>>>> default:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * http
>>>
ssary conflict dependencies either, Since
those are very popular providers, we are pretty sure it is good
to have them installed by everyone and it will make it easier
to migrate for Airflow 1.10 users.
Unless someone objects until Monday 7th of December, 3:30 pm,
we will include those
>>>>>> * ftp
>>>>>> * sqlite
>>>>>> * imap
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This will slightly increase the size of Airflow installation, because
>>>>>> none of them requires any additional dependencies, so no risk for
>> none of them requires any additional dependencies, so no risk for
>>>>> unnecessary conflict dependencies either, Since those are very popular
>>>>> providers, we are pretty sure it is good to have them installed by
>>>>> everyone
>>>>>
ize of Airflow installation, because
>>>> none of them requires any additional dependencies, so no risk for
>>>> unnecessary conflict dependencies either, Since those are very popular
>>>> providers, we are pretty sure it is good to have them installed by everyone
&
t; providers, we are pretty sure it is good to have them installed by everyone
>>> and it will make it easier to migrate for Airflow 1.10 users.
>>>
>>> Unless someone objects until Monday 7th of December, 3:30 pm, we will
>>> include those extras as defaults in the upcoming RC candidate of Apache
>>> Airflow 2.0.
>>>
>>> J.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Jarek Potiuk
>>> Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer
>>>
>>> M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
>>> [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/>
>>>
>>>
isk for
>> unnecessary conflict dependencies either, Since those are very popular
>> providers, we are pretty sure it is good to have them installed by everyone
>> and it will make it easier to migrate for Airflow 1.10 users.
>>
>> Unless someone objects until Mond
l
> make it easier to migrate for Airflow 1.10 users.
>
> Unless someone objects until Monday 7th of December, 3:30 pm, we will
> include those extras as defaults in the upcoming RC candidate of Apache
> Airflow 2.0.
>
> J.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Jarek Potiuk
>
pcoming RC candidate of Apache
Airflow 2.0.
J.
--
Jarek Potiuk
Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer
M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
[image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/>
Hi all,
Here are the notes from our Airflow 2.0 dev call earlier today. Thank you
all who joined the call.
To all those who attended, can you please double-check and add if I missed
something?
To those who did not join, please voice your opinion if you disagree with
anything in the summary or
ipts are).
>
> I think we need to discuss and capture at least community recommendations
> on that and make it clear in the migration docs.
>
> J.
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 3:33 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I would like to remind whoever is i
Kaxil Naik wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to remind whoever is interested in helping in Airflow 2.0
> Release process that we will have our weekly developer call today:
>
> *Airflow 2.0 Dev Call Calendar Link*:
> https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=c_dhdh3bdjc
Hi all,
I would like to remind whoever is interested in helping in Airflow 2.0
Release process that we will have our weekly developer call today:
*Airflow 2.0 Dev Call Calendar Link*:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=c_dhdh3bdjc42c4ngtnpg7ovcs9g%40group.calendar.google.com&
Hi all,
I would like to remind whoever is interested in helping in Airflow 2.0
Release process that we will have our weekly developer call today:
*Airflow 2.0 Dev Call Calendar Link*:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=c_dhdh3bdjc42c4ngtnpg7ovcs9g%40group.calendar.google.com&
I have updated our meeting notes document to summarize the discussion from
our dev call for Airflow 2.0 this Monday.
Thank you all who joined the call.
*Doc Link*:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Meeting+Notes#MeetingNotes-#13:16Nov2020
To all those who attended, can you
Hi all,
I would like to remind whoever is interested in helping in Airflow 2.0
Release process that we will have our weekly developer call today:
*Airflow 2.0 Dev Call Calendar Link*:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=c_dhdh3bdjc42c4ngtnpg7ovcs9g%40group.calendar.google.com&
I have updated our meeting notes document to summarize the discussion from
our dev call for Airflow 2.0 this Monday.
Thank you all who joined the call.
*Doc Link*:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Meeting+Notes#MeetingNotes-#12:9Nov2020
To all those who attended, can you
Hi all,
I would like to remind whoever is interested in helping in Airflow 2.0
Release process that we will have our weekly developer call today:
*Airflow 2.0 Dev Call Calendar Link*:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=c_dhdh3bdjc42c4ngtnpg7ovcs9g%40group.calendar.google.com&
Hi all,
I have updated our meeting notes document to summarize the discussion from
our dev call for Airflow 2.0 this Monday.
Thank you all who joined the call.
*Doc Link*:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Meeting+Notes#MeetingNotes-#11:2Nov2020
To all those who attended, can
Hi all,
I would like to remind whoever is interested in helping in Airflow 2.0
Release process that we will have our weekly developer call today:
*Airflow 2.0 Dev Call Calendar Link*:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=c_dhdh3bdjc42c4ngtnpg7ovcs9g%40group.calendar.google.com&
Hi all,
I have updated our meeting notes document to summarize the discussion from
our dev call for Airflow 2.0 this Monday.
Thank you all who joined the call.
*Doc Link*:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Meeting+Notes#MeetingNotes-#10:26Oct2020
To all those who attended
Hi all,
I would like to remind whoever is interested in helping in Airflow 2.0
Release process that we will have our weekly developer call today:
*Airflow 2.0 Dev Call Calendar Link*:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=c_dhdh3bdjc42c4ngtnpg7ovcs9g%40group.calendar.google.com&
to figure out how to use them
>>
>> So, just examples... (not to copy/paste, but to get inspired)
>>
>> Thx,
>> Fabien
>>
>> On 2020/09/18 12:44:03, Kaxil Naik wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > One of the thing that we skipped in last Airf
x27;s sometimes kind of hard to figure out how to use them
>
> So, just examples... (not to copy/paste, but to get inspired)
>
> Thx,
> Fabien
>
> On 2020/09/18 12:44:03, Kaxil Naik wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > One of the thing that we skipped in last Airflow 2.0
9.6 and 13 sound like a good plan :)
On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 1:51 PM Ash Berlin-Taylor wrote:
> Given my experience with Postgres in the past, I've never noticed any
> regressions between versions, not for the kind of run-of-the-mill usage we
> are doing, so I would vote for testing oldest versi
Given my experience with Postgres in the past, I've never noticed any
regressions between versions, not for the kind of run-of-the-mill usage we are
doing, so I would vote for testing oldest version we want to support (to make
sure the features we use are in that version) and the latest stable.
Following the discussions in Slack:
https://apache-airflow.slack.com/archives/CCQ7EGB1P/p1603448752476900
Which versions of Postgres we should support and use in Airlfow 2.0?
According to: https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/
Version Current minor Supported First Release Final Release
20 at 1:35 AM Vikram Koka wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have updated our meeting notes document to summarize the discussion from
> our dev call for Airflow 2.0 on Monday.
>
> Thank you all who joined the call.
>
> *Doc Link*:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/
Hi all,
I have updated our meeting notes document to summarize the discussion from
our dev call for Airflow 2.0 on Monday.
Thank you all who joined the call.
*Doc Link*:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Meeting+Notes#MeetingNotes-#9:19Oct2020
<https://cwiki.apache.
lestone?
>
> This way we might use the 2.0 meeting time effectively and then decisions
> on when we release which version might be more "data-driven" than
> "wish-driven" :).
>
> J
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 12:30 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
>
Hi all,
I would like to remind whoever is interested in helping in Airflow 2.0
Release process that
we will have our weekly developer call today:
*Airflow 2.0 Dev Call Calendar Link*:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=c_dhdh3bdjc42c4ngtnpg7ovcs9g%40group.calendar.google.com&
Hello everyone,
I think with the recent merges and a lot of work from many people, we are
getting really close to releasing first Alpha and then Beta releases of
Airflow 2.0 (finally!).
We have regular Monday's meetings (7.30 CEST) led by Kaxil and I'd
encourage everyone to ta
then decisions
on when we release which version might be more "data-driven" than
"wish-driven" :).
J
On Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 12:30 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have updated our meeting notes document to summarize the discussion from
> our dev call for Air
Hi all,
I have updated our meeting notes document to summarize the discussion from
our dev call for Airflow 2.0 yesterday.
Thank you all who joined the call.
*Doc Link*:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Meeting+Notes#MeetingNotes-#7:5Oct2020
To all those who attended, can
Hi all,
I would like to remind whoever is interested in helping in Airflow 2.0
Release process that
we will have our weekly developer call today:
*Airflow 2.0 Dev Call Calendar Link*:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=c_dhdh3bdjc42c4ngtnpg7ovcs9g%40group.calendar.google.com&
re are some rather
> weird-looking left-overs in Ash's change that are only there because of
> pickling.
>
> I think we already know that Serialization becomes a first-class citizen
> in Airflow 2.0. And while we know the first versions of serialization had
> some teething
the thing that we skipped in last Airflow 2.0 dev was around
> "documentation". The main reason for skipping it in the meeting was to
> gather good data-points and feedbacks from the community.
>
> So my question to everyone reading this email is "What impro
ur dev call for Airflow 2.0 yesterday.
>
> Thank you all who joined the call.
>
> *Doc Link*:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Meeting+Notes#MeetingNotes-#6:28Sep2020
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Meeting+Notes#MeetingNotes-%236:28Se
Hi all,
I am sending this out since Kaxil is juggling other obligations. I have
updated our meeting notes document to summarize the discussion from
our dev call for Airflow 2.0 yesterday.
Thank you all who joined the call.
*Doc Link*:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Meeting
higher likelihood of users in the community reading the documentation for
technical guidance.
With Airflow 2.0 being worked on, perhaps we could also think about refreshing
the FAQs given the questions we see on Slack/other channels and perhaps
anticipate some questions around 2.0 that might
Hi all,
I would like to remind whoever is interested in helping in Airflow 2.0
Release process that we will have our weekly developer call today:
*Airflow 2.0 Dev Call Calendar Link*:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=c_dhdh3bdjc42c4ngtnpg7ovcs9g%40group.calendar.google.com&
port packages #10014
>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/10014
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, due to other obligations, I likely won't be able to
>>> complete any of those this week and I will have very little time this week
>>> in general, so any
t; anyone who would like to take it over - feel free.
>>
>> I will do my best to be able to take part in the meeting on Monday.
>>
>> J.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 9:09 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>&g
anyone who would like to take it over - feel free.
>
> I will do my best to be able to take part in the meeting on Monday.
>
> J.
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 9:09 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have created a document to summarize the discussio
eated a document to summarize the discussion from our dev call for
> Airflow 2.0 this Monday. Apologies for the delay in publishing the Meeting
> Notes.
>
> Thank you all who joined the call.
>
> *Doc Link*:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Meeting+
Hi all,
I have created a document to summarize the discussion from our dev call for
Airflow 2.0 this Monday. Apologies for the delay in publishing the Meeting
Notes.
Thank you all who joined the call.
*Doc Link*:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Meeting+Notes#MeetingNotes-#5
Hi all,
I am an engineer, and currently we are exploring airflow for better deployment
of our legacy pipelines.
So my main suggestion for the documentation is all the methods ,whether
in-built or contributed , should have small examples attached alongside their
explanation.This would enrich the
l Naik wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > One of the thing that we skipped in last Airflow 2.0 dev was around
> > "documentation". The main reason for skipping it in the meeting was to
> > gather good data-points and feedbacks from the community.
> >
tizen in
Airflow 2.0. And while we know the first versions of serialization had some
teething problems - most of which have been already addressed (the most
interesting one was few orders of magnitude increase in outbound traffic
from the Airflow to the DB - but it's already fixed I believe).
I
ments (not a list of
metrics) would be appreciated by users.
Cheers,
Tomek
On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 2:44 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> One of the thing that we skipped in last Airflow 2.0 dev was around
> "documentation". The main reason for skipping it in the meeting wa
p 18, 2020 at 5:01 AM Kaxil Naik wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We briefly discussed how pickling is currently used in Airflow codebase and
> whether or not we should remove it for 2.0 in the Airflow 2.0 Dev call this
> Monday.
>
> Currently, AFAIK only *CeleryExecutor* supports pickli
used in Airflow codebase and
> whether or not we should remove it for 2.0 in the Airflow 2.0 Dev call this
> Monday.
>
> Currently, AFAIK only *CeleryExecutor* supports pickling (code
> <
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/master/airflow/executors/executor_loader.py
Hi all,
One of the thing that we skipped in last Airflow 2.0 dev was around
"documentation". The main reason for skipping it in the meeting was to
gather good data-points and feedbacks from the community.
So my question to everyone reading this email is "What improvements do you
w
Hi all,
We briefly discussed how pickling is currently used in Airflow codebase and
whether or not we should remove it for 2.0 in the Airflow 2.0 Dev call this
Monday.
Currently, AFAIK only *CeleryExecutor* supports pickling (code
<https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/master/airflow/execut
thers - either here or in the PR.
J.
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 8:21 PM Jarek Potiuk
wrote:
> Good summary. Thanks, Kaxil!
>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 5:12 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have created a document to summarize the discussion from
much deeper "breaking" changes between 2/3 versions of airflow - for
>> example refactoring the whole interface of BaseOperator. And it will
>also
>> give the provider <> airflow version relation that Vikram was talking
>about.
>>
>> I updated the AIP-8
&g
Good summary. Thanks, Kaxil!
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 5:12 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have created a document to summarize the discussion from our third dev
> call for Airflow 2.0.
>
> Thank you all who joined the call.
>
> *Doc Link*:
> https://cwiki
t; example refactoring the whole interface of BaseOperator. And it will also
> give the provider <> airflow version relation that Vikram was talking about.
>
> I updated the AIP-8
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/AIP-8+Split+Providers+into+Separate+Packages+fo
Hi all,
I have created a document to summarize the discussion from our third dev
call for Airflow 2.0.
Thank you all who joined the call.
*Doc Link*:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Meeting+Notes#MeetingNotes-#4:14Sep2020
To all those who attended, can you please double
on, Sep 14, 2020 at 12:10 PM Kaxil Naik
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to remind everyone that we will have our third
> developer
> > > > > call today:
&g
> > > (copy-paste error - It is our 4th call)
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 12:10 PM Kaxil Naik
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I would like to remind everyone that we will have our third de
; On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 12:10 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I would like to remind everyone that we will have our third developer
> > > call today:
> > >
> > > *Airflow 2.0 Dev Call Calendar Link*:
> > >
ne that we will have our third developer
> > call today:
> >
> > *Airflow 2.0 Dev Call Calendar Link*:
> >
> https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=c_dhdh3bdjc42c4ngtnpg7ovcs9g%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=Europe%2FLondon
> > *Time*: 5:30-6:
ctoring the whole interface of BaseOperator. And it will also give the
provider <> airflow version relation that Vikram was talking about.
I updated the AIP-8
<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/AIP-8+Split+Providers+into+Separate+Packages+for+Airflow+2.0>
to reflect that we a
(copy-paste error - It is our 4th call)
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 12:10 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to remind everyone that we will have our third developer
> call today:
>
> *Airflow 2.0 Dev Call Calendar Link*:
> https://calendar.google.c
Hi all,
I would like to remind everyone that we will have our third developer call
today:
*Airflow 2.0 Dev Call Calendar Link*:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=c_dhdh3bdjc42c4ngtnpg7ovcs9g%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=Europe%2FLondon
*Time*: 5:30-6:30 PM GMT
*Zoom Link*:
h
type,
and then scripting we write ourselves to build up a CHANGELOG for each provider.
As I said above, I would _like_ us (the Airflow project) to do the work
of deciding SemVer/breaking changes, rather than each of our users
having to do this. But In this instance I am willing to be persauded otherwise
be
> contributors committing the code or release manager releasing those
> packages?
> Note that the latter literally requires to review those all packages and
> decide on a
> case-by-case basis. I would never want to do it personally on regular
> basis.
>
> What do you thin
o do it personally on regular basis.
What do you think Ash? Which option do you propose?
J.
> -ash
>
> On Sep 13 2020, at 9:28 pm, Jarek Potiuk wrote:
>
> > Hello Everyone,
> >
> > Last week, at the Airflow 2.0 meeting the people involved made a decision
>
he freedom
to make backwards-incompatible changes to a provider (within the same
major Airflow release). This is what HashiCorp have done with their
terraform providers modules.
-ash
On Sep 13 2020, at 9:28 pm, Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> Last week, at the Airflow 2.0 meetin
://cloudmagic.com/k/d/mailapp?ct=dx&cv=10.0.50&pv=10.15.6&source=email_footer_2
> > ]
> > On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 1:57 PM, Kevin Yang wrote:
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 1:29 PM Jarek Potiuk
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hello
binding)
>
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 1:29 PM Jarek Potiuk
> wrote:
>
> > Hello Everyone,
> >
> > Last week, at the Airflow 2.0 meeting the people involved made a
> decision
> > that we are releasing Airlow 2.0 as a set of separate "core"
+1 (binding).
via Newton Mail
[https://cloudmagic.com/k/d/mailapp?ct=dx&cv=10.0.50&pv=10.15.6&source=email_footer_2]
On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 1:57 PM, Kevin Yang wrote:
+1 (binding)
On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 1:29 PM Jarek Potiuk
wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> Last wee
+1 (binding)
On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 1:29 PM Jarek Potiuk
wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> Last week, at the Airflow 2.0 meeting the people involved made a decision
> that we are releasing Airlow 2.0 as a set of separate "core" and
> "providers" packages - simila
Hello Everyone,
Last week, at the Airflow 2.0 meeting the people involved made a decision
that we are releasing Airlow 2.0 as a set of separate "core" and
"providers" packages - similarly to the 1.10 "backport providers" packages.
This decision effectively implem
Scheduler HA was already on Agenda
> <
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Meeting+Notes#MeetingNotes-ThingstoDiscussNext
> >
> for next Monday's Airflow 2.0 DEV call where we could discuss it in detail
> but I definitely think we should get Scheduler H
Hi Jarek and all,
Scheduler HA was already on Agenda
<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Meeting+Notes#MeetingNotes-ThingstoDiscussNext>
for next Monday's Airflow 2.0 DEV call where we could discuss it in detail
but I definitely think we should get Scheduler HA in 2
Jarek,
It has been our intention (as Astronomer) to release the Scheduler HA work
directly to open source as part of Airflow 2.0.
We realized early on that the Scheduler reliability and performance were
highlighted as the key issues from the community as part of the latest
survey results from
larly over this but it
> > did keep me away last night when I started to think about it :).
> >
> > I have a feeling that while we already defined some - rather
> > aggressive -
> > timelines for 2.0, the subject of HA Scheduler was not touched in the
> > previous Ai
think about it :).
>
> I have a feeling that while we already defined some - rather
> aggressive -
> timelines for 2.0, the subject of HA Scheduler was not touched in the
> previous Airflow 2.0 meetings. We are not very far from the release
> but the
> HA scheduler is impl
about it :).
>> >
>> > I have a feeling that while we already defined some - rather aggressive
>> -
>> > timelines for 2.0, the subject of HA Scheduler was not touched in the
>> > previous Airflow 2.0 meetings. We are not very far from the release but
&g
ht when I started to think about it :).
> >
> > I have a feeling that while we already defined some - rather aggressive -
> > timelines for 2.0, the subject of HA Scheduler was not touched in the
> > previous Airflow 2.0 meetings. We are not very far from the release but
>
feeling that while we already defined some - rather aggressive -
> timelines for 2.0, the subject of HA Scheduler was not touched in the
> previous Airflow 2.0 meetings. We are not very far from the release but the
> HA scheduler is implemented inside Astronomer and we have not seen any code
&g
for 2.0, the subject of HA Scheduler was not touched in the
previous Airflow 2.0 meetings. We are not very far from the release but the
HA scheduler is implemented inside Astronomer and we have not seen any code
for it yet in the community. I understand that a lot of work (not only
development but
Thanks, Vikram for updating the planning page.
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 5:43 PM Vikram Koka wrote:
> Thanks Kaxil, this looks right to me as well.
> I updated the main Airflow 2.0 planning page as well to reflect the current
> scope and milestones based on this meeting.
>
> *Doc
Thanks Kaxil, this looks right to me as well.
I updated the main Airflow 2.0 planning page as well to reflect the current
scope and milestones based on this meeting.
*Doc Link*:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Airflow+2.0+-+Planning
I also wanted to thank Kevin from the
LGTM! Thanks, Kaxil for putting this together. It is really helpful!
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 12:29 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have created a document to summarize the discussion from our third dev
> call for Airflow 2.0.
>
> Thank you all who joined the call.
>
&g
Hi all,
I have created a document to summarize the discussion from our third dev
call for Airflow 2.0.
Thank you all who joined the call.
*Doc Link*:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Meeting+Notes#MeetingNotes-#3:7Sep2020
To all those who attended, can you please double
e still have.
> >
> >They seem to be easy to handle by making providers "plugins" and
> >extending
> >the plugin mechanism a bit. Thanks Kamil for the thoughtful input!
> >
> >On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 8:08 PM Jarek Potiuk
> >wrote:
> >
&
Hi all,
I would like to remind everyone that we will have our third developer call
today:
*Airflow 2.0 Dev Call Calendar Link*:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=c_dhdh3bdjc42c4ngtnpg7ovcs9g%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=Europe%2FLondon
*Time*: 5:30-6:30 PM GMT
*Zoom Link*:
h
htful input!
>
>On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 8:08 PM Jarek Potiuk
>wrote:
>
>> Just a short reminder - for some more comments/review on the "PIP
>package
>> model of Airflow 2.0" doc
>>
>>
>https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vV67Qomk_rxVuy1Tj_vrjaNq3
1 - 100 of 231 matches
Mail list logo
