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 Fri, 20 Oct 2017 10:16:00 GMT
Hi Bolke,

This one is a blocker: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1731.

This requirers that we are sure that the /plugin/ folder is on the path:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/blob/eb2f589099b87743482c2eb16261b49e284dcd96/airflow/plugins_manager.py

And maybe add an additional test and updating the docs a bit. Hopefully
somewhere in the next few days, however I'm a bit busy with the Spark
Summit.

Cheers, Fokko

2017-10-19 21:03 GMT+02:00 Bolke de Bruin <bdbruin@gmail.com>:

> Im planning to upgrade our production to 1.9.0alphaX tomorrow.
>
> What are the issues that are open?
>
> Cheers
> Bolke
>
> > On 9 Oct 2017, at 20:24, Chris Riccomini <criccomini@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > K, I will plan on cutting an alpha1 later this week. Something for you
> guys to play with.
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Bolke de Bruin <bdbruin@gmail.com
> <mailto:bdbruin@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > hi Chris,
> >
> > We are still running pre alpha. I am a bit preoccupied with preparing
> for a conference and the team is readying a release of one of our core
> products. So it will probably will be after this week when I get my hands
> dirty again.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Bolke
> >
> > Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad
> >
> > > Op 4 okt. 2017 om 23:35 heeft Chris Riccomini <criccomini@apache.org
> <mailto:criccomini@apache.org>> het volgende geschreven:
> > >
> > > Hey all,
> > >
> > > Checking in. Has anyone tested this in their environments? Stable
> releases
> > > depend on community involvement.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Chris
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 10:30 PM, Chris Riccomini <
> criccomini@apache.org <mailto:criccomini@apache.org>>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I've added AIRFLOW-1635 to the v1-9-test branch. It's not in alpha0,
> but
> > >> will be included in alpha1.
> > >>
> > >>> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 4:13 PM, Feng Lu <fenglu@google.com.invalid>
> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi Chris,
> > >>>
> > >>> I know it's annoying to have last minute commit com in, but this is
a
> > >>> highly desirable feature for folks using GCP operators, is it
> possible to
> > >>> include AIRFLOW-1635
> > >>> <https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/commit/b3e985a3 <
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/commit/b3e985a3>
> > >>> 146272ecfd3ceaaa0d8567e4e9e117d4>
> > >>> in?
> > >>> More than happy to offer help if there's something I can do.
> > >>> Thanks a lot.
> > >>>
> > >>> Feng
> > >>>
> > >>> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Chris Riccomini <
> criccomini@apache.org <mailto:criccomini@apache.org>>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Hey all,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I have cut a 1.9.0alpha0 release of Airflow. You can download it
> here:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/airflow/1.
> 9.0alpha0/ <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/
> airflow/1.9.0alpha0/>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The bin tarball can be installed with pip:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>  pip install apache-airflow-1.9.0alpha0+incubating-bin.tar.gz
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The goal is to have the community install and run this to expose
any
> > >>> bugs
> > >>>> before we move on to official release candidates.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Here are the outstanding blocker bugs for 1.9.0:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>  AIRFLOW-1525 |Improvement |Fix minor LICENSE & NOTICE issue
> > >>>>  AIRFLOW-1258 |Bug         |TaskInstances within SubDagOperator
are
> > >>> marked
> > >>>> as
> > >>>>  AIRFLOW-1055 |Bug         |airflow/jobs.py:create_dag_run()
> exception
> > >>>> for
> > >>>> @on
> > >>>>  AIRFLOW-1018 |Bug         |Scheduler DAG processes can not log
to
> > >>> stdout
> > >>>>  AIRFLOW-1013 |Bug         |airflow/jobs.py:manage_slas() exception
> > >>> for
> > >>>> @once
> > >>>>  AIRFLOW-976  |Bug         |Mark success running task causes it
to
> fail
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Cheers,
> > >>>> Chris
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Chris Riccomini <
> criccomini@apache.org <mailto:criccomini@apache.org>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Welp. Work got in the way, so I'll cut the beta on Monday.
:)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Chris Riccomini <
> > >>> criccomini@apache.org <mailto:criccomini@apache.org>>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Works for me. Will try and cut a beta before end of week.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Blockers for 1.9.0 are:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> AIRFLOW-1611 |Bug         |Customize logging in Airflow
> > >>>>>> AIRFLOW-1525 |Improvement |Fix minor LICENSE & NOTICE
issue
> > >>>>>> AIRFLOW-1258 |Bug         |TaskInstances within SubDagOperator
are
> > >>>> marked
> > >>>>>> as
> > >>>>>> AIRFLOW-976  |Bug         |Mark success running task causes
it to
> > >>> fail
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Bolke de Bruin <
> bdbruin@gmail.com <mailto:bdbruin@gmail.com>>
> > >>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Hi Chris
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Can I suggest releasing a beta? The stable branch is
only cut at
> RC
> > >>>>>>> time. Betas allow us a broader exposure. It also gives
us a
> point of
> > >>>>>>> reference.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> In addition the list below are mostly longer standing
issues that
> > >>> are
> > >>>>>>> also part of the 1.8.x branch. Maybe only consider
1611, 1525,
> 1258,
> > >>>> and
> > >>>>>>> 976 as blocker?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Cheers
> > >>>>>>> Bolke
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Op 28 sep. 2017 om 19:49 heeft Chris Riccomini
<
> > >>>> criccomini@apache.org <mailto:criccomini@apache.org>>
> > >>>>>>> het volgende geschreven:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Hey all,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> I was planning to cut a 1.9.0 stable branch and
1.9.0 beta
> > >>> release,
> > >>>> but
> > >>>>>>>> seeing as there are several outstanding bugs, I'm
going to
> delay.
> > >>>> Here
> > >>>>>>> are
> > >>>>>>>> the bugs that I'm tracking:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1611 |Bug         |Customize logging in
Airflow
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1525 |Improvement |Fix minor LICENSE &
NOTICE issue
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1258 |Bug         |TaskInstances within
SubDagOperator
> are
> > >>>>>>> marked as
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1055 |Bug         |airflow/jobs.py:create_dag_run()
> > >>>> exception
> > >>>>>>> for
> > >>>>>>>> @on
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1018 |Bug         |Scheduler DAG processes
can not log
> to
> > >>>>>>> stdout
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1013 |Bug         |airflow/jobs.py:manage_slas()
> > >>> exception
> > >>>>>>> for @once
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-988  |Bug         |SLA Miss Callbacks Are
Repeated if
> > >>> Email
> > >>>> is
> > >>>>>>> Not
> > >>>>>>>> be
> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-976  |Bug         |Mark success running
task causes it
> to
> > >>>> fail
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> These are the priority issues. Once they're merged,
I'll cut the
> > >>>>>>>> v1-9-stable and beta release.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> If you can help clean this up, that would be really
appreciated.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>>>>> Chris
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Chris Riccomini
<
> > >>>>>>> criccomini@apache.org <mailto:criccomini@apache.org>>
> > >>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Marked it for 1.9.0.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Charlie
Jones <
> > >>> cjones@simpli.fi <mailto:cjones@simpli.fi>>
> > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Is there any chance we could include AIRFLOW-988
in 1.9.0? SLA
> > >>>>>>> callbacks
> > >>>>>>>>>> are not working correctly without emails...
Its not a major
> bug,
> > >>>> but
> > >>>>>>> it
> > >>>>>>>>>> does cause us some annoyance in our current
deployment.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Link to Jira:
> > >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-988
<
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-988>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Link to PR:
> > >>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2415
<
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2415>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks!
> > >>>>>>>>>> Charlie Jones
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> CHARLIE JONES
> > >>>>>>>>>> Data Engineer
> > >>>>>>>>>> cjones@simpli.fi <mailto:cjones@simpli.fi>
 |  M:
> 972.821.7631 <tel:972.821.7631>
> > >>>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Programmatic Performance.* Localized.*
> > >>>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> 1407 Texas Street  |  Suite 202  |  Fort
Worth, TX 76102
> > >>>>>>>>>> 800.840.0768 <tel:800.840.0768> 
|  www.simpli.fi <
> http://www.simpli.fi/>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Chris
Riccomini <
> > >>>>>>> criccomini@apache.org <mailto:criccomini@apache.org>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Merged.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Ryan
Buckley <
> > >>>>>>>>>> ryan.buckley@bluecore.com <mailto:ryan.buckley@bluecore.com>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Would it be possible to include
AIRFLOW-1587?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Running dags from the UI is currently
broken on the 1.9.0
> > >>> branch
> > >>>>>>> due
> > >>>>>>>>>> to
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> this issue.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2590
<
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2590>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Ryan
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 8:14 AM,
Driesprong, Fokko
> > >>>>>>>>>> <fokko@driesprong.frl
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi All,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to include AIRFLOW-1611
in the 1.9.0 release:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2631
<
> 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 <mailto:criccomini@apache.org>
> > >>>>>>>> :
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Done!
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at
5:11 AM, Michael Crawford <
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> michael.crawford@modernizingmedicine.com
<mailto:
> 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://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> <
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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-1519>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1621
<
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1621>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/commit/
<
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/commit/>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> b6d2e0a46978e93e16576604624f57d1388814f2
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/commit/
<
> 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
<mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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
<mailto: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_ru
> > >>>>>>>>>> n()
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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