kaxil commented on PR #49433:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/49433#issuecomment-2826974253

   Yeah that sounds about right. The UI thing is no longer an issue in Airflow 
3 as we don't use the `airflow task run` command anymore, so you can ignore it. 
   
   
   > @kaxil Oh, thank you for thoroughly reviewing the history and carefully 
analyzing the original intention behind the code. Based on your insights, I 
believe the following changes would be appropriate—could you please confirm if 
this approach makes sense?
   > 
   > * Remove executor-related environment variables from the default K8s pod 
template and example files.
   > * Resolve the mismatch issue where the UI displays a command that differs 
from the actual one executed by the pod.
   > * Address the validation failure caused by the executor in tasks running 
on worker pods.
   > * Add appropriate tests.
   
   
   Yeah, feel free to create separate PRs for them. One for Helm Chart and one 
for K8s provider. 
   
   > * Remove executor-related environment variables from the default K8s pod 
template and example files.
   
   
   I am glad that you are contributing, definitely here to help wherever 
needed. Some test in Helm Chart gives a good idea: Example 
https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/helm-tests/tests/helm_tests/airflow_aux/test_pod_template_file.py
   
   > P.S. This is my first contribution to this project, so I hope you'll 
excuse my rough edges. Regarding the scope of testing—do you have any guidance 
on what would be expected? I think I can follow the guidelines for unit and K8s 
tests, but I'm a bit unfamiliar with how to write tests for the UI part. Would 
providing a screenshot to demonstrate that the mismatch issue has been resolved 
be acceptable?
   
   


-- 
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