potiuk commented on PR #43329:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/43329#issuecomment-2505152767

   Hmm. Actually I looked closer (something was wrong here)
   
   I think this is (and I completely forgot about ) - a bit different issue. 
What we are currently doing - we do not have at all node /yarn/pnpm in Breeze. 
We are using and expecting is that `pre-commit` will manage the node pnmp/yarn 
environment for us.
   
   ```
         - id: compile-ui-assets
           name: Compile ui assets (manual)
           language: node
           stages: ['manual']
           types_or: [javascript, ts, tsx]
           files: ^airflow/ui/
           entry: ./scripts/ci/pre_commit/compile_ui_assets.py
           pass_filenames: false
           additional_dependencies: ['[email protected]']
         - id: compile-ui-assets-dev
           name: Compile ui assets in dev mode (manual)
           language: node
           stages: ['manual']
           types_or: [javascript, ts, tsx]
           files: ^airflow/ui/
           entry: ./scripts/ci/pre_commit/compile_ui_assets_dev.py
           pass_filenames: false
           additional_dependencies: ['[email protected]']
         - id: compile-www-assets
           name: Compile www assets (manual)
           language: node
           stages: ['manual']
           'types_or': [javascript, ts, tsx]
           files: ^airflow/www/
           entry: ./scripts/ci/pre_commit/compile_www_assets.py
           pass_filenames: false
           additional_dependencies: ['[email protected]']
         - id: compile-www-assets-dev
           name: Compile www assets in dev mode (manual)
           language: node
           stages: ['manual']
           'types_or': [javascript, ts, tsx]
           files: ^airflow/www/
           entry: ./scripts/ci/pre_commit/compile_www_assets_dev.py
           pass_filenames: false
           additional_dependencies: ['[email protected]']
   ```
   
   So we do not even have anything in the image.
   
   
   I think the idea of doing similar caching in image (my idea) was really 
wrong. We could move node + all things to the image but it's not really needed. 
   
   I am not really sure if we should do much now - the intermittent issues with 
node did not appear recently - so maybe just abandoning it for now is a better 
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.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to