Re: [VOTE] AIP-68 Extended Plugin Interface for React Views

+1 (binding) On 2024/07/26 16:01:21 "Scheffler Jens (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T)" wrote: > Hi, > > Brent and me have revised the AIP-68 based on the other Airflow 3.x > discussions we had and as no further discussions are open we assume it is > ready to vote: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display

Re: [VOTE] AIP-68 Extended Plugin Interface for React Views

+1 (binding) Best, Wei > On Jul 27, 2024, at 7:23 AM, Pavankumar Gopidesu > wrote: > > +1 (non-binding). > > > Regards, > Pavan Kumar > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 7:05 PM Aritra Basu > wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> -- >> Regards, >> Aritra Basu >> >> On Fri, 26 Jul 2024, 10:32 pm Sadha

Re: [VOTE] AIPs 73 74 75: Data Awareness with Assets

+1 (non-binding) Regards, Pavan Kumar On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 5:55 PM Brent Bovenzi wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 11:14 AM Shahar Epstein wrote: > > > +1 binding > > > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 4:23 PM Tzu-ping Chung > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Since feedbac

Re: [VOTE] AIP-68 Extended Plugin Interface for React Views

+1 (non-binding). Regards, Pavan Kumar On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 7:05 PM Aritra Basu wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > -- > Regards, > Aritra Basu > > On Fri, 26 Jul 2024, 10:32 pm Sadha Chilukoori, > wrote: > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024, 9:04 AM Scheffler Jens (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T)

Re: AWS Open Source Credits Program

That's wonderful news. On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 12:34 PM Oliveira, Niko wrote: > Hello folks, > > This is a short note to announce that the AWS Open Source Credits Program > has approved us for another round of credits this year. $31,000 of credits > have been deposited in our Apache Airflow AWS

[Meeting Notes] Airflow 3.0 Dev call - 25 July 2024

Hey all, I have updated our meeting notes document to summarize the discussion from our 25th July dev call for Airflow 3.0. Link: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/8ApeEg#Airflow3Devcall:MeetingNotes-25July2024 To all those who attended, can you please double-check and add if I have missed a

Airflow Summit 2024 Workshops

[image: Airflow Summit 2024] Start planning your trip! Visit the Airflow Summit website to find out some tips on how to get to San Francisco, what to do and where to stay. Join us for the event reception and check out the confirmed workshop

Re: AWS Open Source Credits Program

Awesome! Very cool, thanks for sharing On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 12:40 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > Whoa. Fantastic! > > This means that we should double our efforts to bring back self-hosted > runners based on the K8S controller. > > The past framework is broken as of a week so we switch to all-publi

Re: AWS Open Source Credits Program

Whoa. Fantastic! This means that we should double our efforts to bring back self-hosted runners based on the K8S controller. The past framework is broken as of a week so we switch to all-public infrastructure - but it is ... slow... I hope that we can make it work soon and speed up our infra

Re: AWS Open Source Credits Program

Awesome, thanks for the good news. On Fri, 26 Jul 2024 at 20:34, Oliveira, Niko wrote: > Hello folks, > > This is a short note to announce that the AWS Open Source Credits Program > has approved us for another round of credits this year. $31,000 of credits > have been deposited in our Apache Air

AWS Open Source Credits Program

Hello folks, This is a short note to announce that the AWS Open Source Credits Program has approved us for another round of credits this year. $31,000 of credits have been deposited in our Apache Airflow AWS account as of yesterday! These credits help to run portions of our hosted testing infra

Re: [DISCUSS] External event driven scheduling in Airflow

+1 on the comments of Vikram and Jarek, added main points on confluence Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Vikram Koka Sent: Friday, July 26, 2024 8:46:55 PM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] External event driven scheduling in

Re: [DISCUSS] Approaches to bugfixes for 2.10 after main becomes 3.0

Same comment as Jens. There will be things removed in Airflow-3 that will need only-Airflow-2 fixes. I like the idea of automated cherry-picker, but it only make sense if we pay attention to which PRs are going to be cherry-picked and do so at the moment of merging - we are going to have many chan

Re: [VOTE] AIP-80: Explicit Template Fields in Operator Arguments

I think I like where the discussion took this. I was +0 on it based on my initial reading and generally don't vote unless I feel more strongly than that, but based on the direction the conversation is going, I like the issues that have been addressed and adjustments that are being made. +1 (bi

Re: [DISCUSS] External event driven scheduling in Airflow

Vincent, Thanks for writing this up. The overview looks really good! I will leave my comments in the AIP as well, but at a high level they are both relatively focused on the "how", rather than the "what". With respect to the pull / polling approach, I completely agree that some incarnation of thi

Re: [DISCUSS] Approaches to bugfixes for 2.10 after main becomes 3.0

I fully agree. We should document it. There is one exceptional case. In my view this should be planned and documented as exception: if something needs to be fixed that is not on main anymore (e.g. code to integrate Fab) then a fix pr mist be made against v2-10-test branch as it can not be made

Re: [VOTE] AIP-68 Extended Plugin Interface for React Views

+1 (non-binding) -- Regards, Aritra Basu On Fri, 26 Jul 2024, 10:32 pm Sadha Chilukoori, wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024, 9:04 AM Scheffler Jens (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Brent and me have revised the AIP-68 based on the other Airflow 3.x > > discussions we

Re: [DISCUSS] Approaches to bugfixes for 2.10 after main becomes 3.0

It was also mentioned in the call chat, CPython uses cherry-picker[1] to automatically create cherry-pick PRs for version branches. They have a GitHub bot that listens to PR events, and when a PR is merged to main, automatically creates back-porting PRs. You can see it in action here[2] (just a

[DISCUSS] Approaches to bugfixes for 2.10 after main becomes 3.0

Hi all, In the last Airflow 3 dev call yesterday, we agreed that the main branch will become the Airflow 3.0 branch on 9th August after 2.10.0rc1 is cut. Once that happens, we need to handle bugfixes PR differently, as we want to continue releasing bugfixes as part of 2.10 patch releases. The code

Re: [VOTE] AIP-68 Extended Plugin Interface for React Views

+1 (non-binding) On Fri, Jul 26, 2024, 9:04 AM Scheffler Jens (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) wrote: > Hi, > > Brent and me have revised the AIP-68 based on the other Airflow 3.x > discussions we had and as no further discussions are open we assume it is > ready to vote: > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluenc

Re: [VOTE] AIPs 73 74 75: Data Awareness with Assets

+1 (binding) On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 11:14 AM Shahar Epstein wrote: > +1 binding > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 4:23 PM Tzu-ping Chung > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Since feedback has died down on these AIPs, I’m calling for a vote on the > > first three Data Awareness AIPs listed above. > > > >

Re: [VOTE] AIP-68 Extended Plugin Interface for React Views

+1 (binding) On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 12:41 PM Jarek Potiuk wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 6:20 PM Vincent Beck wrote: > > > +1 binding. Very cool and needed feature allowing users to customize > React > > views in Airflow! > > > > On 2024/07/26 16:01:21 "Scheffler Jens (XC-AS

Re: [VOTE] AIP-80: Explicit Template Fields in Operator Arguments

Yeah. I think if we have the operator compatibility and a way how we could just develop providers in "Airflow 3" mode that will keep automatically compatibility for Airlfow 2 (for a long-ish time) - I'd change my vote from +0.5 to +1. That would alleviate all my concerns. On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 5

Re: [VOTE] AIP-68 Extended Plugin Interface for React Views

+1 (binding) On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 6:20 PM Vincent Beck wrote: > +1 binding. Very cool and needed feature allowing users to customize React > views in Airflow! > > On 2024/07/26 16:01:21 "Scheffler Jens (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T)" wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Brent and me have revised the AIP-68 based on the

Re: [VOTE] AIP-68 Extended Plugin Interface for React Views

+1 binding. Very cool and needed feature allowing users to customize React views in Airflow! On 2024/07/26 16:01:21 "Scheffler Jens (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T)" wrote: > Hi, > > Brent and me have revised the AIP-68 based on the other Airflow 3.x > discussions we had and as no further discussions are open

[VOTE] AIP-68 Extended Plugin Interface for React Views

Hi, Brent and me have revised the AIP-68 based on the other Airflow 3.x discussions we had and as no further discussions are open we assume it is ready to vote: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/AIP-68+Extended+Plugin+Interface+for+React+Views Quote: “After the completion of AI

Re: [VOTE] AIP-80: Explicit Template Fields in Operator Arguments

+1 (binding) - it's an important feature IMO, and after reading the AIP and the comments here - I think that TP's suggestion for compatibility and migration mitigates the related concerns. On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 10:44 AM Tzu-ping Chung wrote: > Hi all, > > I’m calling for a vote on AIP-80: Exp

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Airflow Python Client 2.9.1 from 2.9.1rc1

+1 (non-binding) On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 11:39 AM Utkarsh Sharma wrote: > Hey fellow Airflowers, > > I have cut the first release candidate for the Apache Airflow Python Client > 2.9.1. > This email is calling for a vote on the release, which will last for 72 > hours. Consider this my (binding)

Re: [VOTE] AIPs 73 74 75: Data Awareness with Assets

+1 binding On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 4:23 PM Tzu-ping Chung wrote: > Hi all, > > Since feedback has died down on these AIPs, I’m calling for a vote on the > first three Data Awareness AIPs listed above. > > AIP-73 Expanded Data Awareness > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/TAyTEg > > AIP-74 In

Re: [DISCUSS] External event driven scheduling in Airflow

Thanks Vincent. I took a look and I have a general comment. I strongly think external driven scheduling is really needed - especially, it should be much easier for a user to "plug-in" such an external event to Airflow. And there are two parts of it - as correctly stated there - pull and push. For

Re: [VOTE] AIP-80: Explicit Template Fields in Operator Arguments

> For the first case, the operator does not actually interact with the > templates—only Airflow is (logic in BaseOperator)—and the custom operator > class only cares about what fields are templated, and what the rendered > values are. I’ve decided therefore to make BaseOperator in Airflow 3 still >

Re: [DISCUSS] AIP-81: Enhanced Security in CLI via Integration of API

Thanks - that looks cool and great you want to take it on :). I think the point you made Vikram is very important and worth mentioning here on the devlist. One of the "common" part of AIP-72, AIP-78, AIP-82 but also the parallel stream of security review of our dependencies, will be connected to t

Re: [VOTE] AIP-80: Explicit Template Fields in Operator Arguments

I considered breakages that are likely to happen for a third-party operator. Without actually looking into them, from experience, they generally need to do one of the following two things (or both) in the task: 1. Access the templated values in execute() 2. Access the arguments containing a temp

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Airflow Python Client 2.9.1 from 2.9.1rc1

+1 (binding): checked reproducibility, signatures, checksums - sources are generated from Airflow code so no need to check licences. I run it against lates Airflow with the test script and it works fine. All good. On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 10:41 AM Utkarsh Sharma wrote: > Hey fellow Airflowers, >