It can, could you please raise a PR?

Shahar


On Mon, Sep 28, 2026, 16:20 Wei Lee <[email protected]> wrote:

> The changelog in common.ai provider is technically right. (from commit
> history perspective)
>
> ```
> Add branch_descriptions to LLMBranchOperator so the model reads what each
> branch means (#73639)
> ```
>
> but it can be misleading as it's changed into branches later on (within
> 0.10.0rc1).
> Could we also change it before release?
>
> On 2026/09/28 10:40:34 Shahar Epstein wrote:
> > Thank you very much!
> > edge3 will be excluded from the current release (-1 binding).
> >
> >
> > Shahar
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 28, 2026 at 1:27 PM PoAn Yang <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Shahar,
> > >
> > > Thanks for preparing this release!
> > >
> > > I found a regression in apache-airflow-providers-edge3 5.0.0rc1 that
> comes
> > > from my own PR #72048 [1]. When the scheduler restarts while Edge task
> > > instances from the previous scheduler are still queued or running, the
> new
> > > scheduler crashes on startup with DetachedInstanceError. It keeps
> crashing
> > > the same way on every restart for as long as those task instances stay
> > > queued or running. I reproduced it with the RC from PyPI on Airflow
> 3.3.2.
> > > The edge3 4.3.2 does not have the problem. I also tried the upgrade
> path:
> > > after a scheduler running edge3 4.3.2 queues some Edge tasks and
> stops, the
> > > first scheduler start after upgrading to 5.0.0rc1 crashes the same way.
> > >
> > > Could we exclude edge3? The fix is in [2]. Once that PR is merged,
> edge3
> > > could go out in an rc2.
> > >
> > > +1 (non-binding) for amazon, apache.beam and google
> > > -1 (non-binding) for edge3 because of this regression
> > >
> > > [1] https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/72048
> > > [2] https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/73832
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > PoAn
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Sep 27, 2026, at 4:00 PM, Sameer Mesiah <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > >
> > > > I can verify that my changes for the Amazon and Snowflake providers
> for
> > > > this release wave are working as expected.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 25 Sep 2026 at 09:50, Wei Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> +1 (binding), checked:
> > > >>
> > > >> - SVN
> > > >> - in Docker installation
> > > >> - Reproducible package builds
> > > >> - Licence
> > > >> - Signature
> > > >> - Checksums
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks!
> > > >>
> > > >> Best regards,
> > > >> Wei Lee
> > > >>
> > > >> On 2026/09/25 08:22:48 Pankaj Koti via dev wrote:
> > > >>> +1 non-binding
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Tested that my PRs are included in the RC and working as expected,
> > > thanks
> > > >>> for cutting the release!
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2026 at 3:32 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> +1 (binding)
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Checked:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> * SVN: all expected files present (check-release-files), and all
> 78 RC
> > > >>>>  providers install at their RC versions (Dockerfile.pmc)
> > > >>>> * Signatures: all 157 good (Shahar's key from KEYS)
> > > >>>> * Checksums: all 157 SHA512 good
> > > >>>> * Licences: Apache RAT 0.18 - 0 unapproved, 0 unknown
> > > >>>> * Reproducible builds: the source tarball and all 156 packages are
> > > >>>>  byte-identical when rebuilt from the providers/2026-09-22 tag
> with
> > > >>>>  flit 4.0.2
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> One note on reproducibility, not a blocker: the wheels were built
> with
> > > >>>> flit 4.0.2, but dev/breeze/uv.lock at the tag locks flit 4.1.0.
> Since
> > > >>>> flit builds without isolation, rebuilding with the locked Breeze
> (as
> > > >>>> the docs say) gives 75 wheels that differ only in the "Generator:"
> > > >>>> line of their WHEEL file (and its hash in RECORD) - the packaged
> files
> > > >>>> are identical. I opened a PR explaining how to rebuild with the
> > > >>>> release manager's flit version:
> > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/73699
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I also tested all my changes in this wave with all 78 RC providers
> > > >>>> installed from the PyPI wheels in Breeze (Airflow 3.3.2):
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> * #72162 (amazon, google, microsoft.azure) - remote log uploads
> > > outside
> > > >>>>  base_log_folder are skipped, uploads inside still work
> > > >>>> * #72166 (google) - Drive q= values are escaped
> > > >>>> * #73413 (common.sql) - DataFusion error message shows the storage
> > > type
> > > >>>> * #72627 (edge3) - docs only, present in the release
> > > >>>> * #72174 (snowflake) and #72176 (teradata) - in the wave, though
> not
> > > >>>>  listed in the testing issue - both work as expected
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Improvement to the verification process:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I tested all my changes with an agent using Apache Magpie's
> > > >>>> release-management
> > > >>>> "verify-rc" skill and a new Airflow override that adds an optional
> > > >> "test
> > > >>>> your own changes" step. The agent found my entries in the testing
> > > issue
> > > >>>> (and the two changes missing from it), verified each change is in
> the
> > > >>>> RC tags, changelogs and wheels, downloaded the whole wave and
> wrote a
> > > >>>> Dag exercising every change - I only had to start Breeze and
> trigger
> > > >> it.
> > > >>>> It also ran the regular checks above and tracked down the flit
> > > >>>> difference.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> That was a very good experience - I highly recommend trying it:
> > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/73697
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> J.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

Reply via email to