airflow-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jarek Potiuk <Jarek.Pot...@polidea.com>
Subject Re: Tagging of the airflow images
Date Tue, 11 Jun 2019 20:21:28 GMT
Yeah Kamil - python 3.5 is the default one for now. I think we should have
another discussion here - how many versions to support. There is this
ticket opened today : https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-4762 about
supporting python 3.6 and 3.7 in tests. Anyone has a strong opinion on
this? I am for testing on all 3.5, 3.6 and 3.7 even if it increases the
build/test time on Travis. There are a number of differences between those
major versions (I have a blog post about it in writing ) but I think there
is concern about eating Apache Travis time.

Anyone against those three ?

On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 8:38 PM Kamil BreguĊ‚a <kamil.bregula@polidea.com>
wrote:

> 1) I would prefer to use one repository.
> +1
>
> 2) The presented schema looks logical to me. I had doubts whether
> Python 3.5 was a good choice for "latest" version, but I checked that
> travis uses only this version.
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 3:04 PM Jarek Potiuk <Jarek.Potiuk@polidea.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > We are close to finish AIP-10 (Airlfow image for CI) and seems that we
> will
> > start working soon on an official image AIP, but in the meantime we have
> > 1.10.4 release coming and we would like to agree tagging scheme used for
> > the current CI images. We discussed it a bit on Slack, but it's time to
> > bring it here. I created a JIRA issue for it:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-4764  and my proposals
> after
> > the initial discussion are those:
> >
> > First of all we have different images that we can talk about :
> >
> >    1. "base" one - with bare development-ready airflow with minimum set
> of
> >    dependencies
> >    2. "CI" with all the tools packages that are needed for CI tests
> >    3. Soon we will likely have an "official" one which might be used in
> >    similar fashion as the "puckel" one.
> >
> > There are two decisions to make:
> >
> > 1) How to keep those images - in one repository or whether we should have
> > separate repos.
> >
> > It is easier for now to keep all of them within apache/airflow
> > <https://cloud.docker.com/u/apache/repository/docker/apache/airflow>
> repository
> > it seems and use a labelling scheme to separate those (there is nothing
> > wrong with that but it might seem a bit hacky). It's a bit easier to
> > maintain with access and CI.
> >
> > We could also think about separate apache/airflow-ci, apache/airflow-dev,
> > apache/airflow-prod or smth similar - that would require some
> > infrastructure tickets and is not very common.
> >
> > 2) What labelling scheme to use(apache/airflow:label). My proposal is
> > similar to this (if we keep everything in the airflow repository)
> >
> >    - *latest* = latest released version (python 3.5)  = *
> v1.10.3-python3.5*
> >    - *master* = latest master version (python 3.5)  =
> *v2.0.0dev0-python3.5*
> >    - *v1.10.3-python3.5,v1.10.3-python3.6*  - released 1.10.3 with python
> >    3.5/3.6
> >    - *latest-ci *= latest released version of CI variant (python 3.5)
> >    *v1.10.3-ci-python3.5*
> >    - *master-ci* = latest master version of CI variant (python 3.5)
> >    *v2.0.0dev0-ci-python3.5*
> >    - *v1.10.3-ci-python3.5, v1.10.3-ci-python3.6* - released 1.10.3 with
> >    python 3.5/3.6
> >
> >
> > My preference is to keep all the images in one repo and use labelling
> > scheme as above,
> > but I am open to discuss this.
> >
> > J,
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Jarek Potiuk
> > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer
> >
> > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
> > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/>
>


-- 

Jarek Potiuk
Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer

M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
[image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/>

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