> So Jed and me wanted to drop exactly the same topic and propose that we
make a release policy with the Helm chart matching the rest of the SW
release cycle, meaning to release 1.19 as next version and after this
drop support For Airflow <= 2.10. Next year then drop support for
Airflow <3.

+1

On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 8:20 PM Jens Scheffler <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> oh, you catched a topic that I also wanted to drop together with Jed to
> the devlist.
>
> So far the Helm chart never made deprecations for old Airflow versions.
> But we stop supporting Airflow-Versions based on release date, so for
> example with providers release (=tomorrow) we will stop releasing
> providers for Airflow 2.10 and will only further support Airflow 2.11.
> Same like with Python, we dropped support for Python 3.9 and require
> Python 3.10++
>
> So Jed and me wanted to drop exactly the same topic and propose that we
> make a release policy with the Helm chart matching the rest of the SW
> release cycle, meaning to release 1.19 as next version and after this
> drop support For Airflow <= 2.10. Next year then drop support for
> Airflow <3.
>
> Discussion and other opinions open!
>
> Jens
>
> On 11/26/25 19:25, Przemysław Mirowski wrote:
> > Dear Airflow Community,
> > I would like to ask your opinion on removing support for Airflow 1 from
> official Helm Chart.
> > Airflow 1 is unsupported for many years now and I think having it in the
> Helm Chart introduces more complexity. Furthermore it raises the threshold
> for new contributors, cause it general all of the changes in the Helm Chart
> now should support Airflow in version 1, 2 and 3.
> > Before dev list I created a discussion topic on GitHub - Removal of
> Airflow 1 support from official Helm Chart · apache/airflow · Discussion
> #58691<https://github.com/apache/airflow/discussions/58691>.
> > Best Regards,
> > P.M.
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

Reply via email to