Apologies for chiming in late. I read the AIP now, please find my questions/comments below:
1. Why do we need to move the DAGs from example_dags ? 2. Hardcoding DebugExecutor using environment variables like that doesn't feel right. Might cause issues when running with other executors. 3. The Watcher task - why do we need that? If the example DAGs don't set any Trigger rules, the default Trigger rule is "all_success" so the DagRun will fail if any task fails. The only thing I think is needed to make the example DAGs actually run in CI/locally is making sure the values comes from Environment Variables while the DAG itself have sensible defaults. For instance, the following example should work fine if the environment variables are set. AIRFLOW__CORE__EXECUTOR=DebugExecutor python airflow/providers/google/cloud/example_dags/example_gcs_timespan_file_transform.py What would be ideal (according to me) is to have airflow test run work without execution_date which will take care of running it via DebugExecutor. (docs <https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow/stable/cli-and-env-variables-ref.html#test> ) This opens up the possibility for us in future to provide more useful debug logs (like import time, number of DAGs, warn when a DAG doesn't follow best practices etc) via the "airflow test" command. While this is out of scope of the current AIP, I feel it might be a great value add. Just my 2-cents. Regards, Kaxil On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 at 07:20, Mateusz Nojek <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello everyone, > > Since there was no response from the community during the weekend on this > voting, I am extending it for the next 48 hours, so it will end on > Wednesday 23rd February 9 AM CET. > > Current state is: > 2/3 required binding votes, > additional 4 non-binding votes. > > Kind regards, > Mateusz Nojek > > > niedz., 20 lut 2022 o 12:01 Mateusz Nojek <[email protected]> napisał(a): > >> Hi everyone, >> >> It's less than 24 hours till the end of the voting. >> If anyone of you still hesitates, this is the time to share your opinion >> with a vote on this AIP :) >> Thank you! >> >> Kind regards, >> Mateusz Nojek >> >> >> pt., 18 lut 2022 o 21:36 Tomasz Urbaszek <[email protected]> >> napisał(a): >> >>> +1 (binding) >>> >>> Tomek >>> >>
