kaxil commented on a change in pull request #19572:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/19572#discussion_r775046428
##########
File path: airflow/providers/cncf/kubernetes/CHANGELOG.rst
##########
@@ -19,6 +19,19 @@
Changelog
---------
+3.0.0
+.....
+
+Breaking changes
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+* ``Simplify KubernetesPodOperator (#19572)``
+
+.. warning:: Many methods in :class:`~.KubernetesPodOperator` and
class:`~.PodLauncher` have been renamed.
+ If you have subclassed :class:`~.KubernetesPodOperator` will need to
update your subclass to reflect
+ the new structure. Additionally ``PodStatus`` enum has been renamed to
``PodPhase``.
Review comment:
1.10.11 and 1.10.12 were the ones that caused us nightmare where there
were a major Kubernetes refactor, more or so because of the KubernetesExecutor.
But because this change is isolated to Kubernetes provider only and not the
executor, and in the worst case a user can just downgrade their provider
version I am mostly OK with this. After all one of the major goals with
separating of providers was that they will be versioned separately and so users
can pick and choose. And in an accidental case where they upgrade their
provider version unintentionally, they can just downgrade the version without
causing much impact coz DB migrations aren't involved and DAG changes aren't
required.
##########
File path: airflow/providers/cncf/kubernetes/CHANGELOG.rst
##########
@@ -19,6 +19,19 @@
Changelog
---------
+3.0.0
+.....
+
+Breaking changes
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+* ``Simplify KubernetesPodOperator (#19572)``
+
+.. warning:: Many methods in :class:`~.KubernetesPodOperator` and
class:`~.PodLauncher` have been renamed.
+ If you have subclassed :class:`~.KubernetesPodOperator` will need to
update your subclass to reflect
+ the new structure. Additionally ``PodStatus`` enum has been renamed to
``PodPhase``.
Review comment:
1.10.11 and 1.10.12 were the ones that caused us nightmare where there
was a major Kubernetes refactor, more or so because of the KubernetesExecutor.
But because this change is isolated to Kubernetes provider only and not the
executor, and in the worst case a user can just downgrade their provider
version I am mostly OK with this. After all one of the major goals with
separating of providers was that they will be versioned separately and so users
can pick and choose. And in an accidental case where they upgrade their
provider version unintentionally, they can just downgrade the version without
causing much impact coz DB migrations aren't involved and DAG changes aren't
required.
--
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.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
