potiuk commented on PR #44249: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/44249#issuecomment-2493355454
> What's probably best is to make sure you're using the old syntax for every class that is going to be used in the context of a Pydantic model. As discussed in https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic/issues/10924#issuecomment-2493313194 - I think this change is breaking far too much of an existing code base and you are facing the reality that this will cause even more people to limit their Pydantic version to < 2 (it looks like the `dbt` team asked `dbt-databricks` maintainer to do so). While we might likely implement some fix to that (maybe limiting Pydantic to <2.10) in Airflow 2.10.4, this is not a good solution because Pydantic is so popular and used in many, many dependencies, and it's simply not reasonable to expect that existing released code will be updated. It might help if new versions of software are updated but I have a feeling even recent version of released software will start failing with similar issues. So I would seriously reconsider that "fix" and revert it or workaround it in 2.10.2 (at least that's what I'd do as a maintainer of such popular library). -- 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]
