I have updated my draft PR to switch to prek from pre-commit.. And I found the name actually very good.
Previously all over the docs we used "pre-commits" as a synonym for "pre-commit hooks" - because "pre-commit hooks" was too long and "pre-commits" were kinda ok. But it was quite ambiguous as well. Technically speaking, "pre-commit" is the name of the git hook stage. We could configure our hooks to be run as a "pre-push" hook, and then the "pre-commit" was not really "correct". With prefligit, I initially renamed all those places in the docs to be "prefligits" instead of "pre-commits". Which was less ambiguous but also a somewhat strange name. With `prek` - in all those places, we. use "prek hooks". Which is **best name ever** :). - It's short enough, and very correct - because those are the hooks managed and run by prek - regardless if they are configured to run on as pre-commit git or pre-push git hook. I think "prek hooks" is a really nicer way to describe our 170+ hooks. - much nicer than "pre-commits". There are still few small last things to implement (namely - the way how to initialize autocomplete, adding option to list all hooks, and implementing pygrep hooks by the author of prek). But draft PR (just converted it to prek and rebased) is here - https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/54258 I think that if "prek" implements all autocomplete etc. using `breeze static-checks` can be completely dropped. We can also consider leaving `breeze static-checks` to simply run `prek` and pass all the args - without auto-complete capability, but I would rather switch completely to `prek`. One can still use `pre-commit run` if they need - but removing it from `breeze static checks` will generally force people to learn about prek I think, which is a good thing possibly. J. On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 6:52 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > It's kind of what it is - kindergarten for PRs to grow up :D > > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 6:28 PM Daniel Standish > <daniel.stand...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote: > >> oh boy, from prefligit to pre-k 🤦 >> >> On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 8:55 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: >> >> > Way better name - we will have to get used to it, but it does the job. >> > >> > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 5:17 PM Damian Shaw < >> ds...@striketechnologies.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > FYI the author is changing the name to prek: >> > > >> > > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/44995#issuecomment-3168227314 >> > > https://github.com/j178/prek/pull/402 >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Daniel Standish <daniel.stand...@astronomer.io.INVALID> >> > > Sent: Friday, August 8, 2025 9:51 AM >> > > To: dev@airflow.apache.org >> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Upcoming pre-commit -> prefligit change >> > > >> > > Yeah I thought of the typosquatting issue too. It's just one >> character >> > > off and worse, a word that when you see `prefligit`, your brain >> assumes >> > > it's supposed to be preflight (cus prefligit is not a word, and cus >> > > preflight makes a ton of sense conceptually). >> > > >> > > Not my bailiwick, but feels like they will have to change the name. >> > > >> > > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 2:05 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > > We could indeed potentially release "airflow-pre-commit" or >> > > > "airlflow-preflight" package and use it in the docs everywhere - >> that >> > > > might be the "cleanest" solution eventually and prevent >> typosquatting. >> > > > >> > > > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 10:58 AM Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org> >> > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > And a clash on crates.io <http://crates.io/> too >> > > > > https://crates.io/search?q=preflight >> > > > > >> > > > > > On 8 Aug 2025, at 09:52, Tzu-ping Chung >> <t...@astronomer.io.INVALID> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Already taken https://pypi.org/project/preflight/ >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Technically they could even issue a takedown request on the >> ground >> > > > > > of >> > > > > potential confusion attack… >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Changing the name now wouldn’t be a bad idea IMO. But it’s not >> my >> > > > > project so whatever. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > TP >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> On Aug 8, 2025, at 17:31, Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> One of us could also release a separate package on pypi just >> > > > > >> creates >> > > > > convenience shims of `preflight` and even `pre-commit` to invoke >> > > > prefligit >> > > > > if we wanted. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >>> On 8 Aug 2025, at 08:25, Wei Lee <weilee...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> I also thought it was preflight 🤦♂️ Will need some time to >> try >> > > > > >>> it >> > > > > out. But I’m glad to see the new tools being applied. >> > > > > >>> I prefer to keep the `breeze static-check` wrapper (even >> though >> > > > > >>> I >> > > > > usually just invoke pre-commit directly). This might ease our >> > > > > transition >> > > > if >> > > > > we want to do something similar in the future. >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> Best, >> > > > > >>> Wei >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>>> On Aug 8, 2025, at 3:04 PM, Pavankumar Gopidesu < >> > > > > gopidesupa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>> Indeed nice tool. >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>> agree its bit hard to manipulate monorepo with breeze, i am >> > > > > >>>> fine >> > > > with >> > > > > to >> > > > > >>>> drop breeze static-check. >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>> yeah naming bit confused me, i thought same preflight and >> > > > > >>>> searched >> > > > in >> > > > > >>>> google, it got me flight related iternary and checks :) haha >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>> On Fri, 8 Aug 2025 at 07:28, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>>> Plus if we get to monorepo - we would have to also implement >> > > > > complexity of >> > > > > >>>>> that in breeze :( >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 8:25 AM Jarek Potiuk < >> ja...@potiuk.com> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>> In terms of installation, are we looking at `uv tool >> install >> > > > > prefligit` >> > > > > >>>>>> or are we looking to >> > > > > >>>>>> do binary installation? >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> I think it does not matter - it just will need to be >> > > > > >>>>>> installed - >> > > > > but in >> > > > > >>>>>> our docs I think we should recommend `uv tool` as we anyhow >> > > > require >> > > > > uv >> > > > > >>>>> and >> > > > > >>>>>> then it's easy to manage all installed tools `uv tool >> upgrade >> > > > > --all` for >> > > > > >>>>>> example. >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>> keep`breeze static-checks` as a thin wrapper around the >> new >> > > > > prefligit >> > > > > >>>>>> commands. >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> The problem with that (as soon as autocomplete is merged >> for >> > > > > prefligit) >> > > > > >>>>> is >> > > > > >>>>>> that we would have to somehow keep the autocomplete of >> breeze >> > > > > >>>>>> in >> > > > > sync >> > > > > >>>>> with >> > > > > >>>>>> it, which I would like to avoid (I prefer to remove all the >> > > > > >>>>>> code >> > > > > handling >> > > > > >>>>>> it if possible :)). The nice thing with prefligit >> > > > > >>>>>> autocomplete is >> > > > > that it >> > > > > >>>>>> is fast and nice (once merged) - see example here: >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > https://github.com/j178/prefligit/pull/380#issuecomment-3163508993 >> > > > > and >> > > > > >>>>>> trying to get this in breeze will require to leave all the >> > > > > >>>>>> code we >> > > > > use >> > > > > >>>>> now >> > > > > >>>>>> to generate the list and use it for breeze's autocomplete >> > > > > >>>>>> (and >> > > > it's >> > > > > >>>>>> generally visibly slower due to python/click limitations - >> > > > > >>>>>> not >> > > > bad, >> > > > > but >> > > > > >>>>>> that's about few 100 lines of code we could remove if we >> > > > > >>>>>> switch >> > > > > everyone >> > > > > >>>>> to >> > > > > >>>>>> use prefligit. But if others would like to keep the >> > > > "static-checks" >> > > > > >>>>> command >> > > > > >>>>>> - I am also fine with it. >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> What do others think? >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> J. >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 7:54 AM Amogh Desai >> > > > > >>>>>> <amoghde...@apache.org >> > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> wrote: >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>> I am really excited for this one and kept reading it as >> > > > "preflight" >> > > > > >>>>> until >> > > > > >>>>>>> pointed out. >> > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>> The fact that it is 10x faster + built in `uv` support + >> > > > > >>>>>>> separate pre-commit per directory >> > > > > >>>>>>> (upcoming) is really cool! >> > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>> In terms of installation, are we looking at `uv tool >> install >> > > > > prefligit` >> > > > > >>>>> or >> > > > > >>>>>>> are we looking to >> > > > > >>>>>>> do binary installation? Would prefer the latter. >> Regardless, >> > > > > >>>>>>> it >> > > > > would be >> > > > > >>>>>>> great to keep >> > > > > >>>>>>> `breeze static-checks` as a thin wrapper around the new >> > > > > >>>>>>> prefligit commands. >> > > > > >>>>>>> That way, >> > > > > >>>>>>> contributors stay insulated from tooling details, and if >> we >> > > > > >>>>>>> ever >> > > > > switch >> > > > > >>>>>>> tools the wrapper >> > > > > >>>>>>> can remain unchanged. >> > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>> All in all, this looks like a solid improvement and I’m >> > > > > >>>>>>> looking >> > > > > forward >> > > > > >>>>> to >> > > > > >>>>>>> using it. >> > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>> Thanks & Regards, >> > > > > >>>>>>> Amogh Desai >> > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 10:46 AM Aritra Basu < >> > > > > aritrabasu1...@gmail.com> >> > > > > >>>>>>> wrote: >> > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>> I do think the closeness of the name warrants making it >> > > > > >>>>>>>> obvious >> > > > > the >> > > > > >>>>>>>> difference in docs. I had a few moments of confusion >> myself. >> > > > > >>>>>>>> -- >> > > > > >>>>>>>> Regards, >> > > > > >>>>>>>> Aritra Basu >> > > > > >>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>> On Fri, 8 Aug 2025, 9:02 am Jarek Potiuk, >> > > > > >>>>>>>> <ja...@potiuk.com> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > >>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> Yes. Initially I thought the same ("odd choice"). >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> That's a good point and something that we will have to >> all >> > > > learn >> > > > > >>>>> :). I >> > > > > >>>>>>>> even >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> thought that we should maybe leave `breeze >> static-checks` >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> as >> > > > > >>>>> wrapper - >> > > > > >>>>>>>> only >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> because `prefligit` is not something that one would >> easily >> > > use. >> > > > > >>>>>>> However - >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> as most of us use autocomplete, this is something that >> is >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> super >> > > > > easy >> > > > > >>>>>>> to >> > > > > >>>>>>>> not >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> even think about (at least that's my experience after I >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> tried >> > > > it) >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> I do not think we use >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> https://www.npmjs.com/package/@applitools/preflight-cli >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> for >> > > > > >>>>> anything >> > > > > >>>>>>> now >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> - >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> and it requires separate account settings in >> "applitools" >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> - >> > > > this >> > > > > is >> > > > > >>>>>>> the >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> only "popular" preflight CLI I have found. >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> Does it bother anyone that it's easy to mix the two? >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> We could stress it in the docs that it's NOT `preflight` >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> or we >> > > > > could >> > > > > >>>>>>> also >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> leave the breeze "static-checks" wrapper - just to >> handle >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> that >> > > > > (but >> > > > > >>>>> I >> > > > > >>>>>>>> think >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> it's not really necessary and we want to get rid of our >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> custom auto-complete code. >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> J. >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 1:04 AM Tzu-ping Chung >> > > > > >>>>>>> <t...@astronomer.io.invalid> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> I didn’t even realise the name is NOT preflight before >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> you >> > > > > pointed >> > > > > >>>>>>> it >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> out, >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Daniel… >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> TP >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> -- >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On 8 Aug 2025, at 07:11, Daniel Standish >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> <daniel.stand...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote: >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I thought `prefligit` was a typo of `preflight` >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> bit of an odd choice in name >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> but, i guess it's probably not that bad of a choice to >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> avoid >> > > > > >>>>>>>> collisions >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> with `preflight` >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 7, 2025 at 12:28 PM Jarek Potiuk < >> > > > > ja...@potiuk.com >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Indeed! Jo is amazing :) >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 7, 2025 at 8:24 PM Damian Shaw < >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> ds...@striketechnologies.com> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Already fixed and released! >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Damian Shaw <ds...@striketechnologies.com> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 7, 2025 12:28 PM >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> To: dev@airflow.apache.org >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Upcoming pre-commit -> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> prefligit >> > > > > change >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> FYI I found two small issues trying to use it as a >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> drop-in >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> replacement >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> for >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> my work environment: >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/j178/prefligit/issues/387 >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/j178/prefligit/issues/388 >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> But my otherwise quite complicated >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> .pre-commit-config.yaml >> > > > > >>>>>>> (which >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> uses >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> anchors and aliases and remote and local >> environments) >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ran >> > > > > >>>>> fine. >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Damian >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Aritra Basu <aritrabasu1...@gmail.com> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 7, 2025 12:08 PM >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> To: dev@airflow.apache.org >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Upcoming pre-commit -> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> prefligit >> > > > > change >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Definitely agree with both of you, will be trying >> this >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> out >> > > > > >>>>>>> myself >> > > > > >>>>>>>> as >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> well. >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Definitely looking forward to seeing alternatives in >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the >> > > > > >>>>> space! >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Aritra Basu >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Aug 2025, 9:2 pm Jarek Potiuk, < >> > > > ja...@potiuk.com> >> > > > > >>>>>>>> wrote: >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pre-commit is great for its stability but is >> really >> > > > failing >> > > > > >>>>> in >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> terms >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> innovation, the project itself does not allow any >> > > > discussion >> > > > > >>>>> of >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> using >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> new standards. >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Had my fair share of those discussions in the past >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and I >> > > > > >>>>> quite >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> agree. >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is huge difference between "stability" and >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> "stagnation/stubbornness". >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 7, 2025 at 5:39 PM Damian Shaw >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ds...@striketechnologies.com> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just want to say I am very excited to see >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> innovation in >> > > > > >>>>> this >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> space! >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pre-commit is great for its stability but is >> really >> > > > failing >> > > > > >>>>> in >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> terms >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of innovation, the project itself does not allow >> any >> > > > > >>>>>>> discussion >> > > > > >>>>>>>> of >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> using new standards. >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will be testing it out in my own environments >> and >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then >> > > > > >>>>>>>> promoting >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it widely. >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Damian >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 7, 2025 10:01 AM >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: dev@airflow.apache.org >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [DISCUSS] Upcoming pre-commit -> >> prefligit >> > > > change >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello everyone, >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Early warning about upcoming pre-commit/prefligit >> > > > > >>>>> change...... >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Together with Ash and creator of the prefligit: >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/j178/prefligit - we are >> testing >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >> > > > > >>>>>>> helping >> > > > > >>>>>>>> to >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> close the gaps between prefligit and pre-commit >> (and >> > > > later >> > > > > >>>>> we >> > > > > >>>>>>>> hope >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we will be able to improve our prefligit >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> integrations >> > > > with >> > > > > >>>>>>>> upcoming >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> monorepo support especially - which would help us >> to >> > > > > >>>>>>> modularise >> > > > > >>>>>>>> our >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pre-fligits (that's >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> name we will likely start using ;) .. >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems we are very close so I wanted to make a >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> short >> > > > > >>>>>>> "upcoming >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> change" >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> note so that you are aware: >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * *breeze static-checks *will hopefully be gone >> and >> > > > > replaced >> > > > > >>>>>>> by >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> `prefligit` command - the author of prefligit is >> > > > > >>>>>>> super-receptive >> > > > > >>>>>>>> to >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> things >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like `--last-commit` flags and autocomplete >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> including our >> > > > > >>>>> hook >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> names >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> so I >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think we will be able to remove the whole >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> `static-check` >> > > > > >>>>>>>> machinery >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from breeze that added what we needed >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * *prefiligit* uses *uv* by default - no more `uv >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool >> > > > > >>>>> install >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pre-commit --with pre-commit-uv` needed to enable >> it >> > > > (again >> > > > > >>>>>>> the >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> author of prefligit >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way more receptive to the needs of users and there >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will >> > > > be >> > > > > >>>>> no >> > > > > >>>>>>>> need >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> patch >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pre-commit to use `uv` (which effectively `--with >> > > > > >>>>>>> pre-commit-uv` >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does) >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's another step of simplifying our dev env >> setup >> > > > where >> > > > > >>>>>>>> existing >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tooling finally catches up with what we need and >> we >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can >> > > > > >>>>> remove >> > > > > >>>>>>>> some >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> our >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> custom >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (breeze) code that does it (which makes me super >> > > happy). >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> More about it soon, when we get a new release of >> > > > prefligit >> > > > > >>>>>>> that >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> will >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> solve >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all the remaining (small) issues and have >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> auto-complete >> > > > > >>>>> merged >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (contributed >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by someone based on our issue >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/j178/prefligit/pull/380 >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :). >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there are any concerns or doubts - feel free to >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raise >> > > > > >>>>> them >> > > > > >>>>>>> :) >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> J. >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________ 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. >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> B >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > >> KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK >> > > > > CB >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [ X ܚX K K[XZ[ >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ] ][ X ܚX P Z\ ˘\ X K ܙ B ܈ Y ] [ۘ[ [X[ >> > > > K[XZ[ >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ] Z [ Z\ ˘\ X K ܙ B >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________ 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 >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > > - >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> dev-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> dev-h...@airflow.apache.org >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > > >>> ----- To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> dev-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org >> > > > > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@airflow.apache.org >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > > >> ---- To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> dev-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org >> > > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@airflow.apache.org >> > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > ________________________________ >> > > 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. >> > > >> > >> >
