Re: [VOTE] December PR of the Month

I‘d vote for #35719 - because I like external contributions especially to move ahead in UI! Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Briana Okyere Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2024 5:51:12 PM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] December PR of t

Re: [VOTE] Accept AIP-60 (Standard URI representation for Airflow Datasets)

+1 binding as discussed - looking forward for this and THANKS! Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Tzu-ping Chung Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2024 9:07:42 AM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] Accept AIP-60 (Standard URI representation

Re: [VOTE] January 2024 PR of the Month

+1 for #22253 as I favor contributions from non-committers - but also high respect for Jareks PR #36537 which was a great step! W/o putting 22253 on the plate I would habe voted for 36537 Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Hussein Awala Sent:

RE: [ANNOUNCE] Starting experimenting with "Require conversation resolution" setting

I'm with Jarek, feel like an adult and like to see which comments are "open" and which are "resolved". That give clarity for me when I review where something is ready to be merged and which is still in discussion. But I also do not see a real burden for people disliking it, other than 1-3 clicks

Re: [VOTE] AIP 61 - Hybrid Executors

+1 binding - looking forward to implementation! Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Oliveira, Niko Sent: Thursday, February 1, 2024 6:12:02 AM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] AIP 61 - Hybrid Executors Hey folks, The AIP for Hybrid

Re: Idea for Discussion: custom TI dependencies

I like the idea. I‘d propose to write-up an AIP so that details of the concept can be discussed before raising a PR if you feel details might need to be aligned. My concern primarily would be that if somebody uses this and uses external data or parameters from DB that this could bring-down perf

Re: [VOTE] "Require conversation resolution" setting in PRs as permanent solution

+1 binding Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Pankaj Koti Sent: Monday, February 5, 2024 3:36:41 PM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] "Require conversation resolution" setting in PRs as permanent solution +1 (binding) Best reg

Re: [DISCUSS] Rename channels on slack

I was +1 to Jarek first but reading the counter proposal from Vicent I change to +1 like Vincent proposes. Also not against Jarek but shorter is better. Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Vincent Beck Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2024 3:29:24 P

Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate cli options in Airflow Configurations and airflow.api.client

I do not habe a strong opinion on the topic but I am mostly with Jarek. The API must be multi tenant and mask all internal DB access - where we are close-by with AIP-44 and the other efforts of multi tenancy (missing a list of all planned efforts, would be cool to have a mata AIP keeping the com

Re: [DISCUSS] Common.util provider?

Hi Jarek, At reviewing the PR from uranusjr for AIP-60 I also had the feeling that a lot of very similar code is repeated in all the providers. But during review yesterday I dropped the ides because if we have a common piece then we are locking all depending providers (potentially) together if

RE: [DISCUSS] Common.util provider?

this has the drawback that there are extra steps involved and even if it's automated it does add friction when you have to regenerate the code every time you change it and when you change it in another place than where you use it. J. On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 9:02 PM Scheffler Jens (XC-AS/EAE

RE: [DISCUSS] Common.util provider?

wheel and sdist packaged code such symbolically linked file is dereferenced and copy of the file is added there. It could be a nice way of doing it. Maybe then worth trying next time if someone has a need? J On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 12:39 AM Scheffler Jens (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) wrote: > >&g

RE: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.8.2 from 2.8.2rc3

+1 (non-binding) Tested the PRs I contributed as fixes and can confirm all of this is working: - #37672 Fix regression on trigger form error display on form validation - #37497 Allow pre-population of trigger form values via URL parameters - #37063 Bugfix Triggering DAG with parameters is mandatory

RE: [DISCUSS] Considering trying out uv for our CI workflows

@Jarek, had no time to review PR. If the Docker image is ~400MB smaller, I fear there is a diff. Were you able to dump a file list to inspect the diff? If not I would propose to make it in the PR to understand "why". If there care cache files (only) then in general it would make sense to think ab

Re: [VOTE] January 2024 PR of the Month

Oh I totally missed #36797 - I was eagerly waiting for this and for sure would like to spend my +1 for this! Great work! Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Tzu-ping Chung Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 6:18:41 AM To: dev@airflow.apache.org

RE: [VOTE] AIP-59 Performance testing framework

+1 (binding) Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Jens Scheffler Alliance: Enabler - Tech Lead (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) Robert Bosch GmbH | Hessbruehlstraße 21 | 70565 Stuttgart-Vaihingen | GERMANY | www.bosch.com Tel. +49 711 811-91508 | Mobil +49 160 90417410 | jens.scheff...@de.bosch.com Sitz: S

Re: [VOTE] March 2024 PR of the Month

My vote is +1 for #36755 - mainly because it was really a long - runner and important we made it! Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Briana Okyere Sent: Monday, March 25, 2024 8:53:32 PM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] March 2024 P

Re: [VOTE] AIP-64: Keep TaskInstance try history

+1 binding Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Pierre Jeambrun Sent: Monday, March 25, 2024 9:19:36 PM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] AIP-64: Keep TaskInstance try history +1 (binding) On Mon 25 Mar 2024 at 19:32, Igor Kholopo

RE: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.0 from 2.9.0rc3

1+ (Non binding) after fixing all DAGs which generated https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/38811 (Newsfragment) Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Jens Scheffler Alliance: Enabler - Tech Lead (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) Robert Bosch GmbH | Hessbruehlstraße 21 | 70565 Stuttgart-Vaihingen | GERMANY

Re: [DISCUSS] Asynchronous SQLAlchemy

I understand the „all-in“ approach as we were dropping MSSQL… how can we keep one codenase bit cooe with sqlite? I assume we must support this at least for dev setups. Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Jarek Potiuk Sent: Monday, April 8, 202

RE: [ANNOUNCE] New committer: Wei Lee

Welcome to the "club" @ash Haha in the name a copy&paste error from previous welcome 😃 welcome WEI 🎉🥳 Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Jens Scheffler Alliance: Enabler - Tech Lead (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) Robert Bosch GmbH | Hessbruehlstraße 21 | 70565 Stuttgart-Vaihingen | GERMANY | www.bosch.

Re: [VOTE] AIP-67 Multi-team deployment of Airflow components

+1 binding and many thanks for the lively discussion and alignment! Get it going! Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Pierre Jeambrun Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2024 7:14:39 PM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] AIP-67 Multi-team de

[DISCUSS] DRAFT AIP-68 Extended Plugin Interface + AIP-69 Remote Executor

Dear Dev-Community, mainly triggered by the deadline for CFP for Summit I dropped two “brand new” AIP’s as ideas that are running in my head for a longer time. Note these are DRAFT versions as a first write-up as solution concept and are lagging technical design and implementation yet. I’d kin

RE: [HUGE DISCUSSION] Airflow3 and tactical (Airflow 2) vs strategic (Airflow 3) approach

Hi Developers, TLDR Summary: I propose to move the discussion from a Email Replay-to-all chain to a discussion collection in https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/hQv9EQ When I first saw this email from Jarek I was a bit surprised and actually the email was pulling me out of a kind of comfort z

RE: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.1 from 2.9.1rc1

+1 (non binding) - tested 2.9.1rc1 and works great, especially the UI glitches are removed. Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Jens Scheffler Alliance: Enabler - Tech Lead (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) Robert Bosch GmbH | Hessbruehlstraße 21 | 70565 Stuttgart-Vaihingen | GERMANY | http://www.bosch.com

Re: [DISCUSS] simplifying try_number handling

I aleasy had a hard time understanding this, thought it is a feature which I did not understand. So +1 (binding) from my side for cleaning up! Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Brent Bovenzi Sent: Friday, May 3, 2024 4:43:43 PM To: dev@airflo

Re: [HUGE DISCUSSION] Airflow3 and tactical (Airflow 2) vs strategic (Airflow 3) approach

Thanks for the document write-up, Kaxil. I assume this is mostly a vision statement. Looking forward for a larger addendum where we can collect things that we all can vote and agree on as targets. As I started earlier with a confluence page and it seems this is not accessible to all, shall we

RE: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.1 from 2.9.1rc2

Good morning, I re-tested 2.9.1rc2 and also after deployment, code diff checks - no problems found. +1 (non binding) Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Jens Scheffler Alliance: Enabler - Tech Lead (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) Robert Bosch GmbH | Hessbruehlstraße 21 | 70565 Stuttgart-Vaihingen | GERM

Re: [VOTE] Proposal for adding Telemetry via Scarf

+1 binding. Made some comments to the draft PR. Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Kaxil Naik Sent: Thursday, May 9, 2024 4:12:32 AM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] Proposal for adding Telemetry via Scarf Hi all, Discussion thread

[VOTE] AIP-69 Remote Executor

Hi all, Discussion thread: https://lists.apache.org/thread/8hlltm9brdxqyf8jyw1syrfb11hl52k5 I would like to officially call for a vote to add a Remote Executor feature to Airflow – via a provider package. All details are documented in: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/AIP

RE: [VOTE] AIP-69 Remote Executor

e to see it come up and > > >would > love > > >to help out if you need a helping hand. > > > > > >-- > > >Regards, > > >Aritra Basu > > > > > >On Sat, May 18, 2024, 7:15 PM Christian Schilling > > > wrote: &g

Re: [VOTE] May 2024 PR of the Month

I can only agree on all the excellent options but I am ver much like Constance and thank @dstandish for the cleanup in #39336… but close by my +1 (binding) this time goes to #39650! Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Pankaj Koti Sent: Tuesday

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.2 from 2.9.2rc1

+1 non binding Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Phani Kumar Sent: Saturday, June 8, 2024 3:45:18 PM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.2 from 2.9.2rc1 +1 non binding On Sat, 8 Jun 2024, 15:02 Hussein Awala,

RE: [DISCUSS] AIP-69 Remote Executor

m the current AIP it's entirely unclear whether > it is closer to AIP-44 or future isolation where the API will be completely > new. > So I simply do not know what I am voting on. > > Maybe to put it in short terms - I see AIP voting not voting on "Idea" > but

RE: [VOTE] June 2024 PR of the Month

Thanks for the proposals... There was a "late arrival" and month is not over... as it was a long runner and we had a first-time contributor with a long breath making it to the finish line "never gonna give you up" (--> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ)... I'd like to add and +1 vote

RE: [ANNOUNCE] New committer: Ryan Hatter

Welcome to the club! Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Jens Scheffler Alliance: Enabler - Tech Lead (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) Robert Bosch GmbH | Hessbruehlstraße 21 | 70565 Stuttgart-Vaihingen | GERMANY | www.bosch.com Tel. +49 711 811-91508 | Mobil +49 160 90417410 | jens.scheff...@de.bosch.com

RE: [DISCUSS] AIP-69 Remote Executor

, Stefan Grosch, Dr. Markus Heyn, Dr. Frank Meyer, Dr. Tanja Rückert -----Original Message- From: Scheffler Jens (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2024 11:54 PM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] AIP-69 Remote Executor Hi Airflow Dev's, After todays Airflow 3 planning

RE: [VOTE] AIP-72: Task Execution Interface aka Task SDK

+1 binding Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Jens Scheffler Alliance: Enabler - Tech Lead (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) Robert Bosch GmbH | Hessbruehlstraße 21 | 70565 Stuttgart-Vaihingen | GERMANY | www.bosch.com Tel. +49 711 811-91508 | Mobil +49 160 90417410 | jens.scheff...@de.bosch.com Sitz: Stu

RE: [DISCUSS] To AIP-44 or not to AIP-44

Hi, I'd favor to make it usable - especially as we are at 80%. Main motivation is that with our environment we see stability problems with the distributed setup and using Celery, which was the main motivation to spin the discussion about AIP-69. AIP-69 is depending on the feature. Waiting anoth

RE: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.3 from 2.9.3rc1

Hi, weh ave tested 2.9.3rc1 today and found no issues during upgrade. All looks good. +1 non-binding from my side. Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Jens Scheffler Alliance: Enabler - Tech Lead (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) Robert Bosch GmbH | Hessbruehlstraße 21 | 70565 Stuttgart-Vaihingen | GERMAN

RE: [ANNOUNCE] New committers: Rom Sharon & Shahar Epstein

Welcome Rom and Shahar! Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Jens Scheffler Alliance: Enabler - Tech Lead (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) Robert Bosch GmbH | Hessbruehlstraße 21 | 70565 Stuttgart-Vaihingen | GERMANY | www.bosch.com Tel. +49 711 811-91508 | Mobil +49 160 90417410 | jens.scheff...@de.bosch.c

[VOTE] (v2) AIP-69 Remote Executor

Hi Developers, After some further discussion time I’d like to call for a vote for AIP-69. All details are described in: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/AIP-69+Remote+Executor Note: * Compared to first VOTE in https://lists.apache.org/thread/tyfsrpjn12sz9dw50pbg16dsv6lmj

Re: Operator Templating in Airflow 3

Bis +1 from me. The existing Jinja Syntax was a pitfall for all firdt time DAG developers and there are many hard-to-read examples neede for medium conplex things like a dict with templated fields some comments left in the doc. Looking forward for an AIP Sent from Outlook for iOS

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

+1 binding to all 3 AIPs Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Buğra Öztürk Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 11:59:01 PM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] AIPs 73 74 75: Data Awareness with Assets +1 non-binding On Tue, 23 Jul 2024, 23

Re: [VOTE] AIP-66: DAG Bundles and Parsing

+1 binding Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Elad Kalif Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2024 9:50:18 AM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] AIP-66: DAG Bundles and Parsing +1 binding On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 10:27 AM Ephraim Anierobi w

Re: [VOTE] AIP-65: Improve DAG history in UI

+1 binding (just added a comment into AIP to propose to reduce complexity but this is independent of vote) Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Howard Yoo Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2024 12:08:01 AM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE]

Re: [DISCUSS] Add the Microsoft Fabric Provider in Apache Airflow

+1 to all points that Jarek raised. Plus some rather technical/implementation questions: The Fabric includes a lot of tools and features and also advertises a managed Airflow setup (with a bit outdated Airflow version 2.6.3). If a new/additional provider package would be added what kind of oper

Re: [VOTE] July 2024 PR of the Month

My Vote this month is for 40468 - as I hope a couple of errors can be better found by users in UI with this. Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Briana Okyere Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2024 1:05:23 AM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: [VOTE]

RE: [VOTE] AIP-78 Scheduler-managed backfills

+1 binding (I am not using backfill but from the AIP I feel that this consolidation is overdue and should be centralized) Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Jens Scheffler Alliance: Enabler - Tech Lead (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) Robert Bosch GmbH | Hessbruehlstraße 21 | 70565 Stuttgart-Vaihingen | G

RE: [VOTE] (v2) AIP-69 Remote Executor

ting it will take the executors a couple of steps forward. > > > I do agree with Niko regarding the overloading of "Remote", so > > terminology > > > should be revised. > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 8:38 AM Scheffler Jens (XC-A

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

Thanks TP for the rework. I added some comments (iteration 2) on the migration ideas. I think these details make it clearer, still i have partial doubts how much burden we add to users to migrate DAGs to get to version 3. I very much favor the new templating but am not sure how many DAG authors

Re: [DISCUSSION] AIP-83 Remove Execution Date Unique Constraint from DAG Run

I like the voting attitude. Vound my +1 once you start voting 😀 Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Tzu-ping Chung Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2024 9:19:02 AM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] AIP-83 Remove Execution Date Unique

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

Hi, The vote for AIP-68 has passed. Binding +1 votes: * Jens Scheffler * Brent Bovenzi * Vincent Beck * Jarek Potiuk * Wei Lee * Shahar Epstein * Vikram Koka * Jed Cunningham Non-binding votes: * Sadha Chilukoori * Aritra Basu * Pavankumar Gopi

RE: [VOTE] AIP-79 & AIP-84 Remove Flask AppBuilder as a Core Dependency & UI REST API

+1 binding for both (lost overview about all the votes - did I already? 😃) Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Jens Scheffler Alliance: Enabler - Tech Lead (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) Robert Bosch GmbH | Hessbruehlstraße 21 | 70565 Stuttgart-Vaihingen | GERMANY | www.bosch.com Tel. +49 711 811-91508 |

Re: [VOTE] AIP-67 - Multi-team deplyment of Airflow Components

+1 binding. Many thougths and discussions went into this AIP. Also User survery showed a strong demand for this - same we have also in our house. A multi team setup is eagerly needed. Nevertheless the complexity and missing turn-key delivery will be a challenge. I assume it needs to evolve. Bes

Re: [VOTE] AIP-82 - External event driven scheduling in Airflow

+1 binding. - thanks for the discussion! Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Beck, Vincent Sent: Friday, August 2, 2024 9:41:16 PM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] AIP-82 - External event driven scheduling in Airflow Hi everyone, I

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

Added a few comments which shall not block vote - just some technical details. Otherwise +1 for the AIP from my side. (Binding) Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Buğra Öztürk Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2024 10:28:35 PM To: dev@airflow.apache.o

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.10.0 from 2.10.0rc1

Hi, I did extensive tests of the release and besides a small bug in UI (which I rate non-blocking) did not find any problem. Smooth transition. +1 from my side. I am not familar with signature erc checks therefore I‘d call it non-bindung. If binding is needed I need to find time to do the othe

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.10.0 from 2.10.0rc1

Upgrade my +1 to binding, was able to add: -reproducible checks -SVN checks -License checks -Signature checks -SHA513 checks Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Ephraim Anierobi Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2024 7:06:02 PM To: dev@airflow.apache.o

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Airflow 2.10.0 from 2.10.0rc1

Hi Utkarsh, I just found another UI glitch about XCom Display, I think there is a small judgement needed if this should block the release if not too late. Issue is documented as 41514. I wpuld rate it low to medium. Jens Sent from Outlook for iOS ___

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

Ups forgot to respond here, in case of doubt after the last rework I am also in with a +1 binding. Thanks for the adjustments and the great initiative for improvement! Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Tzu-ping Chung Sent: Monday, August 26,

[DISCUSS] Name for the Executor of AIP-69

Hi Airflow-Devs, AIP-69 has come as MVP to the front-door of the repo in form of 3 PRs. But as in the Voting there has been a bit of discussion about how we call that "baby" I'd like to have a wrap-up about the name and see what the majority is for. The AIP-69 defined the implementation as "Rem

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Airflow Python Client 2.10.0 from 2.10.0rc2

Sorry, somehoe my email client did not deliver the RC2 email. Therefore responding to RC1 email and adjusted title... I hope it ends-up in the right thread... Tested reproducibility, svn, checksums, made tests from dist in pypy. +1 binding all good from my side Sent from Outlook for iOS

Re: [DISCUSS] Name for the Executor of AIP-69

; >>> click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and > know > >>> the content is safe. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> AVERTISSEMENT: Ce courrier électronique provient d’un expéditeur > externe. > >>

Re: [VOTE] August 2024 PR of the Month

+1 binding for 41390 - subdags gone is a great step forward! Sent from Outlook for iOS From: Briana Okyere Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 10:40:07 PM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] August 2024 PR of the Month Hey All, It’s onc

Re: [DISCUSS] Name for the Executor of AIP-69

Ilile the additional ideas by Shubham, therefore I change my Voted a bit: * +1 for Remote * +0.9 for Edge - in my view this fits really very good (not the meaning like edge case or the browser named edge) because also some infrastructure providers call remote/sattelite data centers being

Re: [VOTE] Airflow 2.11 as bridge release

Hi Kaxil, +1 binding. With the assumption that AIP-80 was voted I assume we planned to introduce the new templating early. This would be (in my eyes except we see other things we need to mark deprecated to need to add features for migration preparation) the demand for Airflow 2.11 Jens Sent f

AW: New committers: Shubham Raj, Buğra Öztürk, LIU ZHE YOU, Kalyan Reddy !

Congratulations to all 4! Was a pleasure so far working/collaborating together! Well deserved! Exciting to see community growing! Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Jens Scheffler Alliance: Enabler - Tech Lead (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) Robert Bosch GmbH | Postfach 10 60 50 | 70049 Stuttgart | GERMA

AW: Discuss: lets' stop posting on X and muffle our account there.

I am +1 stopping to post and with Constance to keep the history and leaving a final message to announce move. And as also expressed keep the account such that nobody else takes it over. Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Jens Scheffler Alliance: Enabler - Tech Lead (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) Robert

AW: [VOTE] Release Airflow 3.0.0 from 3.0.0rc4 & Task SDK 1.0.0 from 1.0.0rc4

Okay, based on the rule (did not know about this) I upgrade my binding vote from +0.8 to +1 binding. (rounding up still some glitches and gaps in mind) Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Jens Scheffler Alliance: Enabler - Tech Lead (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) Robert Bosch GmbH | Postfach 10 60 50 | 7

AW: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Airflow 3.0.0 Released

Dear Community, This is a major step forward! Congrats to (all of us) who contributed to this! Looking forward to see first bugs coming in, people adopting deployments and hearing success stories from migrations soon or latest on Airflow Summit! Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Jens Schef

AW: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Amogh Desai

Hi Amogh, we saw the great investment and engagement you were putting into Airflow in the past and thanks for all the work. Welcoming you as PMC member and also saying: well deserved! Jens -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Zhe You Liu Gesendet: Donnerstag, 26. Juni 2025 13:35 An: dev@airf

AW: [DISCUSS] Apache Airflow 3.0 Feathercast (was Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Airflow 3.0.3 Released)

If not too many persons already - would raise my hand as well. But three persons is already a good group. -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Jarek Potiuk Gesendet: Freitag, 18. Juli 2025 09:28 An: dev@airflow.apache.org Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Airflow 3.0 Feathercast (was Re: [ANNOUN

AW: [VOTE] Release Airflow 3.0.4 from 3.0.4rc1 & Task SDK 1.0.4 from 1.0.4rc1

@Ash, @Jarek, I can check today at home. I also suspect just the order of files or non-relevant meta data being different. Tar-Balls: Binary different - will inspect later Expended source: Binary identical I assume this is not blocking the release because we care about the content and the sourc