And now I have to rebase my Python 3.13 PR to see if 3.13 also compiles well :D
On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 6:53 PM Aritra Basu <aritrabasu1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yay! 🙌 > -- > Regards, > Aritra Basu > > On Fri, 11 Jul 2025, 9:48 pm Jarek Potiuk, <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > > > Ok. We got it merged again ! > https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/53150 > > is merged. Once you build breeze images after rebase, python there will > be > > built directly from Python official sources (latest released patchlevel > for > > each version - and we have automation to upgrade them soon after new > > patchlevel are released). > > > > We are going to try it for a week or so and see if it all looks good, we > > will proceed to apply it to PROD images. > > > > J. > > > > > > On Sat, Jul 5, 2025 at 10:24 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > > > > > I merget it too early - reverting here > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/52900 as I found an issue with > > > other python versions that I overlooked > > > > > > On Sat, Jul 5, 2025 at 10:06 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > > > > > >> FYI - we just merged Aritra's change to build Python in CI image from > > >> sources https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/52265 -> we will run > it > > >> for a while in CI, i also want to test some self-upgrade scenarios. > > >> > > >> Then we will look at applying it to the PROD image if we find no > > >> surprises. > > >> > > >> It looks really good and we might have slightly more secure images > > >> produced (i.e. getting read of some libraries CVEs faster than the > > >> "official" images. > > >> > > >> Good job Aritra! > > >> J. > > >> > > >> > > >> On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 9:16 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> > wrote: > > >> > > >>> It looks like building from sources on our CI using base debian image > > >>> (with enabled optimizations) "just works" and takes 1m36s. -> and > > taking > > >>> into account that we already have pretty sophisticated CI-level > remote > > >>> caching that will allow to rebuild it only when either base image is > > >>> released or python is released - building sounds like a very good > idea. > > >>> > > >>> J. > > >>> > > >>> On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 7:02 PM Damian Shaw < > > >>> ds...@striketechnologies.com> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Going from source is certainly going to give the most control, I > > >>>> personally choose python-build-standalone for my own images rather > > than > > >>>> building from source to outsource all the build choices, such as > what > > >>>> optimization flags to enable, what compiler tool chains to use, etc. > > >>>> > > >>>> Damian > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> -----Original Message----- > > >>>> From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> > > >>>> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2025 10:15 AM > > >>>> To: dev@airflow.apache.org > > >>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Switching base Python container images to > > >>>> python-standalone ? > > >>>> > > >>>> Thanks Damian - very insightful. And yes - I did not really want to > > >>>> "diminish" the value of community images and work of the > maintainers, > > it > > >>>> was really more on the "we base our image security on the > assumptions > > that > > >>>> it's coming from "official" sources and surely there are some > > guardrails" - > > >>>> which turned out to be not really true. > > >>>> > > >>>> But.... We might not have to even use python standalone. > > >>>> > > >>>> Aritra just tested installation of Python straight from sources -> > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/52265 and I was actually > > pretty > > >>>> surprised how non-problematic and fast it was - and it seems it > > passes all > > >>>> our CI tests. We just need to add a little pre-commit magic to get > > >>>> notified when we should update patchlevel version of Python when a > > new one > > >>>> is released, and we should be able to try it out in CI image - once > > it gets > > >>>> battle-tested with CI/breeze etc. we can transfer this to PROD image > > as > > >>>> well. We already have an idea how to do it - our PROD images are > > optimized > > >>>> for size and do not contain "build essentials" - but I think we > > should be > > >>>> able to build Python in the "build" segment and simply copy > resulting > > >>>> binaries to the "main" segment - since in both cases we use the same > > base > > >>>> image, such 1-1 copy should **just work** - we already do the same > > with > > >>>> installed python packages - we install them (including building when > > >>>> needed) in build segment and we copy-over the installed .venv to the > > >>>> main segment. > > >>>> > > >>>> So ... we might even not need a discussion - installing from Python > > >>>> sources is THE BEST > > >>>> > > >>>> J. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 6:25 PM Damian Shaw < > > >>>> ds...@striketechnologies.com> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> > First, I would like to thank the community members who have been > > >>>> > maintaining the Python docker images, it's one of those thankless > > >>>> > opensource infrastructure volunteer roles that they've been doing > > for > > >>>> > a long time. Unfortunately Docker assigns the title "Official > Image" > > >>>> > for various community run images, which creates a misconception on > > the > > >>>> > guarantees being provided, and if I were a suspicious person I > would > > >>>> > say Docker creates this misconception on purpose to both get free > > work > > >>>> > from community members and make Docker seem more supported by > third > > >>>> > party organizations than it actually is. > > >>>> > > > >>>> > On the topic of python-build-standalone, I've been using it in > > >>>> > production for several months now and I'm fairly happy with it. > > >>>> > > > >>>> > However, one minor reproducibility issue I have when installing > > >>>> > python-build-standalone via uv, is that uv does not have an > ability > > to > > >>>> > pin to a specific build between uv versions, as uv hard codes a > > >>>> > mapping of Python version and platform to a specific build and > then > > >>>> > updates that mapping between releases. So, updating the version of > > uv > > >>>> > between runs, or having two users run different versions of uv to > > >>>> > initialize the environment can change the results. > > >>>> > > > >>>> > While normally such build changes are trivial, if you look at the > uv > > >>>> > 0.7.8 and 0.7.9 changelogs you will see that sometimes they can > have > > >>>> > significant > > >>>> > impact: https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/releases/tag/0.7.8. Also, > > >>>> this > > >>>> > email finally prompted make an issue on this topic: > > >>>> > https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/14263. > > >>>> > > > >>>> > There are other ways to source python-build-standalone, such as > > >>>> > pbs-installer or writing your own script, but I've not yet spent > any > > >>>> > time investigating them, so I can't comment on them. > > >>>> > > > >>>> > Damian > > >>>> > > > >>>> > -----Original Message----- > > >>>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> > > >>>> > Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2025 10:44 AM > > >>>> > To: dev@airflow.apache.org > > >>>> > Subject: [DISCUSS] Switching base Python container images to > > >>>> > python-standalone ? > > >>>> > > > >>>> > Hello here, > > >>>> > > > >>>> > Together with Aritra we are looking into adding a few more things > to > > >>>> > our images (golang tool chain for CI image), also Shahar is > > >>>> > experimenting with Rust tool chain and I also recently realized > (by > > >>>> > some of the issues we had) that 'Docker Official Python Image' > that > > is > > >>>> > part of 'Official Program' [1] is not as 'Official' as I thought > so > > we > > >>>> > discuss about changing the base of our images (first CI and then > > when > > >>>> > we see it works fine - PROD) > > >>>> > > > >>>> > Currently we are using the 'Official' image - but after some > issues > > >>>> > and discussions with people at PyCon and FOSS Backstage (I had a > > >>>> > chance to talk to Python maintainers and even had a few beers with > > >>>> > them) - it turned out that the official Python Image' is > maintained > > by > > >>>> > 'a community's which really is a few pretty random people - and > that > > >>>> > explains for example why we have sometimes unpacked security > > >>>> > vulnerabilities in setuptools etc. - because they made some > > >>>> > compatibility choices and decisions that do not allow them to > > upgrade > > >>>> > easily, also they had some delays in releasing updated Python > > >>>> > versions. And Docker does not **really** do much vetting there. > > >>>> > > > >>>> > So I think it would be good to switch how we build the base for > our > > >>>> images. > > >>>> > And following the experience of `uv python` [2] - it seems that > > maybe > > >>>> > using "python-standalone" [3] project is a good alternative. It's > > >>>> > managed by Astral now (so yes - another dependency on them), but > > what > > >>>> > you have with it you have practically 100% complete Python > > interpreter > > >>>> > installed in seconds. > > >>>> > We could continue using debian-slim as a "base, base image" - and > > >>>> > install python using "python-standalone". There are a few > > >>>> > incompatibilities [4] of the distributions of Python, but there > are > > >>>> > very few and mostly related to some obscure systems > (compatibilities > > >>>> > with terminal in REPL, and gtk / UI integration that is anyhow not > > >>>> > really working in "standard" Python distributions). > > >>>> > > > >>>> > I would love to hear what you think - happy to get any feedback/ > > >>>> > insights, suggestions and answer additional questions, provide > some > > >>>> > links to past "troubles" we had with Python "Official" images etc. > > >>>> > > > >>>> > J. > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > [1] Official Python Images - https://hub.docker.com/_/python [2] > UV > > >>>> > Python installation - > > >>>> https://docs.astral.sh/uv/guides/install-python/ > > >>>> > [3] Python Standalone project - > > >>>> > https://github.com/astral-sh/python-build-standalone > > >>>> > [4] Python Standalone incompatibilities - > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > https://gregoryszorc.com/docs/python-build-standalone/main/quirks.html > > >>>> > ________________________________ > > >>>> > Strike Technologies, LLC (“Strike”) is part of the GTS family of > > >>>> > companies. Strike is a technology solutions provider, and is not a > > >>>> > broker or dealer and does not transact any securities related > > business > > >>>> > directly whatsoever. This communication is the property of Strike > > and > > >>>> > its affiliates, and does not constitute an offer to sell or the > > >>>> > solicitation of an offer to buy any security in any jurisdiction. > It > > >>>> > is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may > > >>>> > contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise > > >>>> protected from disclosure. > > >>>> > Distribution or copying of this communication, or the information > > >>>> > contained herein, by anyone other than the intended recipient is > > >>>> > prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, > please > > >>>> > immediately notify Strike at i...@striketechnologies.com, and > > delete > > >>>> and destroy any copies hereof. > > >>>> > ________________________________ > > >>>> > > > >>>> > CONFIDENTIALITY / PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any > > >>>> > attachments are intended solely for the addressee. This > transmission > > >>>> > is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C > > >>>> > ''2510-2521. The information contained in this transmission is > > >>>> > confidential in nature and protected from further use or > disclosure > > >>>> > under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be > > >>>> > subject to attorney-client or other legal privilege. Your use or > > >>>> > disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that > > >>>> > intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited, and may > subject > > >>>> > you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you > > are > > >>>> > not the intended recipient of this transmission, please DESTROY > ALL > > >>>> > COPIES RECEIVED and confirm destruction to the sender via return > > >>>> transmittal. > > >>>> > > > >>>> ________________________________ > > >>>> Strike Technologies, LLC (“Strike”) is part of the GTS family of > > >>>> companies. Strike is a technology solutions provider, and is not a > > broker > > >>>> or dealer and does not transact any securities related business > > directly > > >>>> whatsoever. This communication is the property of Strike and its > > >>>> affiliates, and does not constitute an offer to sell or the > > solicitation of > > >>>> an offer to buy any security in any jurisdiction. It is intended > only > > for > > >>>> the person to whom it is addressed and may contain information that > is > > >>>> privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. > > >>>> Distribution or copying of this communication, or the information > > contained > > >>>> herein, by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. > If > > you > > >>>> have received this communication in error, please immediately notify > > Strike > > >>>> at i...@striketechnologies.com, and delete and destroy any copies > > >>>> hereof. > > >>>> ________________________________ > > >>>> > > >>>> CONFIDENTIALITY / PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any > > >>>> attachments are intended solely for the addressee. This transmission > > is > > >>>> covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C > > ''2510-2521. > > >>>> The information contained in this transmission is confidential in > > nature > > >>>> and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. > > 106-102, > > >>>> 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to attorney-client or > > other > > >>>> legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any > > purpose > > >>>> other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited, > > and may > > >>>> subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. > If > > you > > >>>> are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please DESTROY > > ALL > > >>>> COPIES RECEIVED and confirm destruction to the sender via return > > >>>> transmittal. > > >>>> > > >>>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org > > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@airflow.apache.org > > >>>> > > >>> > > >
