airflow-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Driesprong, Fokko" <fo...@driesprong.frl>
Subject Re: Airflow 1.9.0 status
Date Tue, 26 Sep 2017 12:14:46 GMT
Hi All,

I would like to include AIRFLOW-1611 in the 1.9.0 release:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2631

Currently importing a custom logging configuration is not work (as far as I
know). Any feedback on the PR would also be appreciated.

Cheers, Fokko


2017-09-25 23:27 GMT+02:00 Chris Riccomini <criccomini@apache.org>:

> Done!
>
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 5:11 AM, Michael Crawford <
> michael.crawford@modernizingmedicine.com> wrote:
>
> > Can you slide the aws and emr connection type fix in?
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1636 <
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1636>
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2626 <
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2626>
> >
> > It keeps the connection type from getting blanked out on edit for these
> > types.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mike
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Sep 21, 2017, at 1:27 PM, Chris Riccomini <criccomini@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Absolutely. Just cherry-picked. I've been looking forward to these
> fixes!
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 5:23 PM, Alex Guziel <alex.guziel@airbnb.com.
> > invalid
> > >> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Can we get this in?
> > >>
> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1519
> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1621
> > >>
> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/commit/
> > >> b6d2e0a46978e93e16576604624f57d1388814f2
> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/commit/
> > >> 656d045e90bf67ca484a3778b2a07a419bfb324a
> > >>
> > >> It speeds up loading times a lot, so it's a good thing to have in 1.9.
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Chris Riccomini <
> > criccomini@apache.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Sounds good. I'll plan on stable+beta next week, then. Initial
> warning
> > >>> stands, that I will start locking down what can get into 1.9.0 at
> that
> > >>> point.
> > >>>
> > >>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:10 AM, Bolke de Bruin <bdbruin@gmail.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> No vote indeed, just to gather feedback on a particular fixed point
> in
> > >>>> time. It also gives a bit more trust to a tarball than to a git
> pull.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Bolke
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> On 20 Sep 2017, at 20:09, Chris Riccomini <criccomini@apache.org>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I can do a beta. Is the process significantly different? IIRC,
it's
> > >>>>> basically the same, just no vote, right?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Bolke de Bruin <
> bdbruin@gmail.com>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Are you sure you want to go ahead and do RCs right away?
Isn’t a
> > >> beta
> > >>> a
> > >>>>>> bit smarter?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> - Bolke
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On 20 Sep 2017, at 19:41, Chris Riccomini <criccomini@apache.org
> >
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Hey all,
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> I want to send out a warning that I'm planning to cut
the stable
> > >>> branch
> > >>>>>>> next week, and begin the RC1 release vote. Once the
stable branch
> > >> is
> > >>>>>> cut, I
> > >>>>>>> will be locking down what commits get cherry picked
into the
> > >> branch,
> > >>>> and
> > >>>>>>> will only be doing PRs that are required to get the
release out.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>>>> Chris
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Chris Riccomini <
> > >>>> criccomini@apache.org
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Hey all,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> An update on the 1.9.0 release. Here are the outstanding
PRs
> that
> > >>> are
> > >>>>>>>> slated to be included into 1.9.0:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> ISSUE ID     |STATUS    |DESCRIPTION
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1617 |Open      |XSS Vulnerability in Variable
endpoint
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1611 |Open      |Customize logging in Airflow
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1605 |Reopened  |Fix log source of local
loggers
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1604 |Open      |Rename the logger to log
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1525 |Open      |Fix minor LICENSE &
NOTICE issue
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1499 |In Progres|Eliminate duplicate and
unneeded code
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1198 |Open      |HDFSOperator to operate
HDFS
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1055 |Open      |airflow/jobs.py:create_dag_run()
> > >> exception
> > >>>> for
> > >>>>>>>> @on
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1019 |Open      |active_dagruns shouldn't
include paused
> > >>> DAGs
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1018 |Open      |Scheduler DAG processes
can not log to
> > >>> stdout
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1015 |Open      |TreeView displayed over
task instances
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1013 |Open      |airflow/jobs.py:manage_slas()
exception
> > >> for
> > >>>>>>>> @once
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-976  |Open      |Mark success running task
causes it to
> > >> fail
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-914  |Open      |Refactor BackfillJobTest.test_backfill_
> > >>>>>> examples
> > >>>>>>>> to
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-913  |Open      |Refactor tests.CoreTest.test_scheduler_
> > >> job
> > >>>> to
> > >>>>>>>> real
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-912  |Open      |Refactor tests and build
matrix
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-888  |Open      |Operators should not push
XComs by
> > >> default
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-828  |Open      |Add maximum size for XComs
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-825  |Open      |Add Dataflow semantics
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-788  |Open      |Context unexpectedly added
to hive conf
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> I will be locking down what can get cherry-picked
into the 1.9.0
> > >>>> branch
> > >>>>>>>> shortly, so if you have something you want in,
please set the
> fix
> > >>>>>> version
> > >>>>>>>> to 1.9.0.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> We (at WePay) have deployed 1.9.0 into our dev
cluster, and it
> has
> > >>>> been
> > >>>>>>>> running smoothly for several days.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> ** I could really use help verifying stability.
If you run
> > >> Airflow,
> > >>>> it's
> > >>>>>>>> in your best interest to deploy the 1.9.0 test
branch somewhere,
> > >> and
> > >>>>>> verify
> > >>>>>>>> it's working for your workload. **
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>>>>> Chris
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message