kaxil opened a new pull request, #74903:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/74903

   The root `pyproject.toml` carries temporary per-package `exclude-newer` 
cutoffs for `typesafe-sdk` (2026-09-19) and `boat-sdk` (2026-10-11). They 
existed so the first release each common.ai extra needs could resolve inside 
the 4-day window, and their comments say to remove them once the window passes 
those dates. It has, so the cutoffs now freeze CI on old versions: `uv.lock` 
had `typesafe-sdk` 0.7.0 and `boat-sdk` 1.9.3, while anyone installing 
`apache-airflow-providers-common-ai[typesafe]` or `[boat]` gets the latest 
release. A stale cutoff of the same kind on `pydantic-ai-skills` hid a real 
break (#74899).
   
   This drops both entries from `[tool.uv.exclude-newer-package]` and 
`[tool.uv.pip.exclude-newer-package]` and relocks just those two packages. The 
lock moves to `typesafe-sdk` 0.7.4 and `boat-sdk` 1.9.7, the newest releases 
outside the global 4-day window, so 0.7.5 and 1.9.9 will roll in on their own. 
`typesafe-sdk` 0.7.4 adds `packaging` and `truststore` as dependencies, and 
both were already in the lock, so no other package moves.
   
   With those versions installed in breeze, the common.ai tests that touch them 
(`sandbox/test_boat.py`, `policies/test_retry.py`, `test_provider_metadata.py`) 
pass, and `infer_model("typesafe:jev-1.13.0")` builds a `TypeSafeModel` on the 
0.7.4 client.
   
   `pydantic-ai-skills` and `google-cloud-aiplatform` are left alone. #74899 
removes the `pydantic-ai-skills` entry from the same two blocks, so whichever 
lands second gets a trivial adjacent-line conflict. `google-cloud-aiplatform` 
is also stale, but moving it means 1.x to 2.x for the google provider, which 
needs its own PR.
   


-- 
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