Great. Thanks! On Tue, 14 Jul 2020 at 15:21, Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote:
> The image for 3.8 is pushed now. I missed the update of 3.8 in 1.10.11 :) > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 3:55 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > BTW. For those interested - here is a sneak peek into the presentation I > > am going to run tomorrow (or today depending on where you are) at the > > Airflow Summit: > > > > *Production Docker Image for Apache Airflow* > > > > From the sneak peek you can find: > > * what questions will be answered > > * what will not be covered by the presentation > > * who the talk is for > > > > The talk is Tuesday mid-day Tokio, early morning EU and late evening > today > > in US. So watch the time-zone (but it is recorded and will be available > to > > watch pretty much immediately after the talk). > > > > Link to the talk here: > > https://airflowsummit.org/sessions/production-docker-image/ > > > > And sneak peek of the presentation here: > > > > > https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1iyIdxihGl87cL8Llvppwla02fikxVYGsH7pHToEZ9A8/edit#slide=id.g58a0b9556c_0_1144 > > > > J. > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 3:46 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> > >>> > >>> "Add Support for Python 3.8 (#8836 > >>> <https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/8836>)(#8823 > >>> <https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/8823>)" is in the changelog > but > >>> seems like *1.10.11-python3.8* tag is missing in DockerHub? > >>> > >> > >> We do not support Python 3.8 in 1.10.* line: > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/master/README.md#requirements > >> > >> J. > >> > >> > >> > >>> On Sun, 12 Jul 2020 at 16:22, Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> > FYI -> the images for 1.10.11 are in DockerHub now. They also include > >>> the > >>> > "latest" tag - which means that anyone running `*docker pull > >>> > apache/airflow*` will get the python3.6 variant of 1.10.11 version of > >>> > image. Also *apache/airflow:1.10.11* points to 3.6 variant. > >>> > > >>> > J. > >>> > > >>> > [image: Screenshot from 2020-07-12 10-19-23.png] > >>> > > >>> > On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 8:43 PM Jarek Potiuk < > [email protected] > >>> > > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > >>> >> Hello Everyone, > >>> >> > >>> >> Before we agree on release cadence of the Charts I have a proposal > for > >>> >> Prod images. They have not been released yesterday with 1.10.11. > >>> >> > >>> >> The relevant Dockerfile changes are part of the officially voted and > >>> >> released sources and those sources are enough to build the image and > >>> push > >>> >> it to the registry. In fact - I am already doing so. > >>> >> > >>> >> I think this is perfectly fine with ASF release policy that we > release > >>> >> the images without extra voting in such case (it's built using the > >>> released > >>> >> sources): > >>> >> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#compiled-packages > >>> >> > >>> >> I think we should continue this way and do not introduce separate > >>> cadence > >>> >> to release the docker images - unless we decide to make an ad-hoc > >>> release > >>> >> at some point. > >>> >> > >>> >> I believe for the image (unlike for the Helm Chart), such ad-hoc > >>> releases > >>> >> are not really possible. We will test the future Helm chart against > >>> >> those released versions of images, and we should maintain backward > >>> >> compatibility. > >>> >> > >>> >> With my proposal (which I am going to talk about next week at my > >>> >> "Production Image talk" and ask for feedback from the users) that if > >>> >> someone wants to customize the image, they should rebuild the image > on > >>> >> their own using either stable (if cautions) or master (if > adventurous) > >>> >> Dockerfile. This way they can get the image much better > >>> size-optimized. > >>> >> With the latest Breeze release, it's super-easy to build your own > >>> image > >>> >> using our Dockerfile - with your own dependencies both on Python. > apt > >>> dev > >>> >> and apt runtime dependencies. > >>> >> > >>> >> J. > >>> >> > >>> >> -- > >>> >> > >>> >> Jarek Potiuk > >>> >> Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer > >>> >> > >>> >> M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129> > >>> >> [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> > > >>> > -- > >>> > > >>> > Jarek Potiuk > >>> > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer > >>> > > >>> > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129> > >>> > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/> > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> > >> Jarek Potiuk > >> Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer > >> > >> M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129> > >> [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/> > >> > >> > > > > -- > > > > Jarek Potiuk > > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer > > > > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129> > > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/> > > > > > > -- > > Jarek Potiuk > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer > > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129> > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/> >
