+1 (with emphasis)
On Sun, Aug 13, 2023 at 5:23 AM Ephraim Anierobi <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 binding > > On Sun, Aug 13, 2023 at 6:57 AM Elad Kalif <[email protected]> wrote: > > > +1 binding > > > > On Sat, Aug 12, 2023 at 9:32 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > The vote doesn't say the release must happen, just that it can > happen. > > > The final decision on when to release is still up to the release > manager. > > > > > > Correct. It's on Ephraim's shoulders to decide :) (No pressure Ephraim > ;) > > > ). > > > > > > On Sat, Aug 12, 2023 at 8:14 PM Ash Berlin-Taylor <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > +100 > > > > > > > > The vote doesn't say the release must happen, just that it can > happen. > > > The > > > > final decision on when to release is still up to the release manager. > > > > > > > > On 12 August 2023 18:36:13 BST, Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > >Hello everyone, > > > > > > > > > >I would like to raise a vote about modifying the result of vote from > > > > >https://lists.apache.org/thread/4dkbwob1wyl3xjbqdsmbd1mvgzflzp1f. > and > > > > >RESTORE dagrun.conf UI option for triggering DAGs in 2.7.0 (which > > means > > > > >preparing RC2). > > > > > > > > > >I am writing that in the name of the release-management "concilium": > > > > >Ephraim, Hussein, Elad, Jens, Pankaj Koti, Rahul Vats, myself > > > > > > > > > >We discussed it today at the #release-management channel about the > > > problem > > > > >with dagrun.conf functionality removal from 2.7.0 "Trigger UI". > > > > > > > https://apache-airflow.slack.com/archives/C03G9H97MM2/p1691833923538419 > > > . > > > > >It's been also raised as concern by Hussein in the original PR and > the > > > > >[VOTE] thread for 2.7.0rc1 > > > > >https://lists.apache.org/thread/pc89dh43kmpj267rpospo1lk5j3j6qkl . > > > > > > > > > >I think we all unanimously agree that removal of that functionality > is > > > > >practically breaking change for many of our users, who will have no > > > choice > > > > >but to modify their DAGs and add param definitions to their DAGs if > > they > > > > >want to continue triggering their DAGs via UI. > > > > > > > > > >While it is a good thing to do and this was the original intention, > > > > >to "push" our users in this direction, we realised that we do not > give > > > the > > > > >users a viable alternative and that effort required to rewrite their > > > DAGs > > > > >might be far too much and might be a huge blocker to 2.7 adoption. > The > > > > >"push" seems to be rather brutal and forceful, not a gentle one. > > > > > > > > > >We did not realise this consequence when we - as a community - ran > > the > > > > >previous vote, but we now think releasing 2.7.0 without this option > > will > > > > >cause a lot of problems. > > > > > > > > > >Since we all share such a unanimous view, we propose (and Ephraim > is > > > > going > > > > >to do so) cancel RC1 and Jens already has PRs that should restore > the > > > > >functionality. PR is shortly coming. > > > > > > > > > >However, that requires modifying the results of the previous vote. > > > > > > > > > >Consider that my binding +1 vote. > > > > > > > > > >We want to accelerate the voting a bit and we also propose to > produce > > an > > > > >RC2 with the option restored to accelerate the process and not to > > delay > > > > the > > > > >2.7.0 release too much. I propose this vote to last till 10 am > Tuesday > > > > 26th > > > > >CEST - that should give enough time for everyone including the > > weekend > > > > >time. > > > > > > > > > >J. > > > > > > > > > >
