ashb commented on a change in pull request #12548:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/12548#discussion_r529487891
##########
File path: setup.py
##########
@@ -658,9 +655,10 @@ def write_version(filename: str = os.path.join(*[my_dir,
"airflow", "git_version
EXTRAS_PROVIDERS_PACKAGES: Dict[str, Iterable[str]] = {
'all': list(PROVIDERS_REQUIREMENTS.keys()),
- # this is not 100% accurate with devel_ci definition, but we really want
to have all providers
- # when devel_ci extra is installed!
+ # this is not 100% accurate with devel_ci and devel_all definition, but we
really want
+ # to have all providers when devel_ci extra is installed!
'devel_ci': list(PROVIDERS_REQUIREMENTS.keys()),
+ 'devel_all': list(PROVIDERS_REQUIREMENTS.keys()),
Review comment:
If beam is truly a dep of airflow (or an optional dep of a dep) then
`devel_all` makes sense and it can stay as it is -- I just wasn't able to see
anywhere in Airflow code that actually did anything with beam other than this
file
https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/c34ef853c890e08f5468183c03dc8f3f3ce84af2/airflow/providers/google/cloud/utils/mlengine_prediction_summary.py
Which is used via
https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/c34ef853c890e08f5468183c03dc8f3f3ce84af2/airflow/providers/google/cloud/utils/mlengine_operator_utils.py#L242-L254
i.e. not on Airflow, but on a remote datprocjob.
And the test doesn't _need_ beam, it could be re-worked to mock the import I
feel
https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/7c6dfcb0bfa2d7654996ae8e3d77ea5a0719089d/tests/providers/google/cloud/utils/test_mlengine_prediction_summary.py.
Happy to tackle this myself it people think it's a good idea.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
