[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-4524?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16873356#comment-16873356
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on AIRFLOW-4524:
-----------------------------------------
alrolorojas commented on pull request #5486: [AIRFLOW-4524] Fix incorrect field
names in view for Mark Success/Failure
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/5486
Another mistake that wasn't caught from apache#5039 - I renamed the fields
in the template (to be unique) but didn't update the view
Make sure you have checked _all_ steps below.
### Jira
- [x] My PR addresses the following [Airflow
Jira](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW/) issues and references
them in the PR title. For example, "\[AIRFLOW-XXX\] My Airflow PR"
- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-4524
- In case you are fixing a typo in the documentation you can prepend your
commit with \[AIRFLOW-XXX\], code changes always need a Jira issue.
- In case you are proposing a fundamental code change, you need to create
an Airflow Improvement Proposal
([AIP](https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Airflow+Improvements+Proposals)).
- In case you are adding a dependency, check if the license complies with
the [ASF 3rd Party License
Policy](https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x).
### Description
Another mistake that wasn't caught from apache#5039 - I renamed the fields
in the template (to be unique) but didn't update the view
### Commits
- [x] My commits all reference Jira issues in their subject lines, and I
have squashed multiple commits if they address the same issue. In addition, my
commits follow the guidelines from "[How to write a good git commit
message](http://chris.beams.io/posts/git-commit/)":
1. Subject is separated from body by a blank line
1. Subject is limited to 50 characters (not including Jira issue reference)
1. Subject does not end with a period
1. Subject uses the imperative mood ("add", not "adding")
1. Body wraps at 72 characters
1. Body explains "what" and "why", not "how"
### Code Quality
- [ ] Passes `flake8`
----------------------------------------------------------------
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]
> "Ignore All Deps" and "Ignore Task Deps" doesn't ignore task dependencies
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: AIRFLOW-4524
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-4524
> Project: Apache Airflow
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: ui
> Affects Versions: 1.10.3
> Reporter: James Meickle
> Assignee: Ash Berlin-Taylor
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 1.10.4
>
> Attachments: Screenshot 2019-05-16 09.15.00.png
>
>
> After an upgrade from Airflow 1.10.1->1.10.3, we're seeing this behavior when
> trying to "Run" a task in the UI with "Ignore All Deps" and "Ignore Task
> Deps":
> {code:java}
> "Could not queue task instance for execution, dependencies not met: Trigger
> Rule: Task's trigger rule 'all_success' requires all upstream tasks to have
> succeeded, but found 1 non-success(es). upstream_tasks_state={'successes': 1,
> 'skipped': 0, 'upstream_failed': 0, 'failed': 0, 'done': 1, 'total': 2},
> upstream_task_ids={'XXX', 'XXX'}"
> {code}
> I suspected this was due to the checkbox not getting applied so I
> investigated this in Chrome. Here's a 1.10.3 POST (broken):
> {code:java}
> dag_id: MY_DAG_ID
> task_id: MY_TASK_ID
> execution_date: 2019-05-15T00:00:00+00:00
> origin: MY_AIRFLOW_SERVER
> ignore_all_deps:
> ignore_ti_state:
> ignore_task_deps:
> ignore_all_deps: true
> ignore_task_deps: true
> downstream: true
> recursive: true
> {code}
> And here's a 1.10.1 POST (working):
> {code:java}
> task_id: MY_TASK_ID
> dag_id: MY_DAG_ID
> ignore_all_deps: true
> ignore_task_deps: true
> ignore_ti_state: false
> execution_date: 2019-05-16T11:00:00+00:00
> origin: MY_AIRFLOW_SERVER
> {code}
> It looks like the JS here is doing something wonky and sending blank values
> for unchecked boxes, as well as checkboxes that don't apply to the current
> action, which is presumably breaking parsing when the server receives a json
> object with multiple conflicting keys.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
