potiuk commented on PR #43403: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/43403#issuecomment-2439724758
Actually - this is not correct/complete - is really a breaking change. So var PythonVirtualenv operator used "virtualenv" package to create the venvs, not the built-in venv. Also there is a dedicated `[virtualenv]` extra to install the package. The package is here: https://pypi.org/project/virtualenv/ Note that virtualenv is stil maintained till today, even if venv became available This is mostly due to historical reasons, but also because `virtualenv` created venv behaves slightly differently than the built-in venv one (one of the differences for example is that it cannot be relocatable). I do not think we are bound to any specifics of `venv` vs `virtualenv` - however when customers use PythonVirtualenvOperat (and `virtualenv` under the hood) they might rely on some internals and differences of `virtualenv` vs `venv`. So while I sympathise with the change - since `venv` is now built-in in Python since 3.3 - I think a change to use `venv` instead of `virtualenv` needs to be discussed in devlist, ending up as a potentially breaking change in Airflow 3 and newsfragment. Also this change is plainly wrong - creating virtualenv currently actually uses "virtualenv" command line not `venv` module - so if we accept it as it is, it will check for `venv` but actually will use for `virtualenv`. -- 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]
