bugraoz93 commented on issue #60668: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/60668#issuecomment-3770080039
> > I’ve put together a PR to address this issue. I’d love to hear your opinions on the approach. > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/60750 > > To ensure backward compatibility, I’ve implemented a new approach that avoids the breaking changes found in the earlier version. > https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/60783 I would rather be on the side of closing this and create a new one to discuss that more if you think there is a problem but I think this is behavior. @uplsh580 Even PR should be enough for discussions then no need for a specific issue too. What you think would be improvement validation step to helm which could be great according to template Thanks bot for quick responses! Closing the issue as it seems non-sensitive is working. Our secret_masker is checking whether the defined field in config template sensitive which as seen it is. Why the other visible is the config moved from core to database while the visible value is from core. You can delete that safely for 3.1.0 version. Config path https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/54bd5d8cd9f6f477cc83445737614dec81c4323c/airflow-core/src/airflow/config_templates/config.yml#L523 Sensitive flag https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/54bd5d8cd9f6f477cc83445737614dec81c4323c/airflow-core/src/airflow/config_templates/config.yml#L532 -- 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]
