A follow up here...
Since the "pull_request_target" removal has to be done in all active
branches, I also backported the change to v2-10-test. This is a MASSIVE PR
- because rather than cherry-picking all changes from "main" I had to
simply take main version of our CI and dev scripts, copy them to v2-10-test
and adapt them back to 2.10 reality (providers in "airflow/providers",
Python 3.8, no "task_sdk" and so on).
https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/45527
I proposed how this can be reviewed despite it being a massive change
(+13,819 −11,299) - but even that is somewhat revieweable. This is really a
"hybrid" case - as part of the code ("ci and dev scripts") is taken from
`main` and the "production code" is from `v2-10-test", if you make two
comparisons - for those two parts - each of them should make sense.
I know I am asking a lot from reviewers, but I would love to finish it.
Last step will also be backporting the change to `providers/fab-v1-5`
branch - but since that one was done after all the major changes above,
that should be easy.
J.
On Mon, Jan 6, 2025 at 4:46 PM Vincent Beck <vincb...@apache.org> wrote:
> Wow! Massive change! Thanks to all who contributed :)
>
> On 2025/01/06 08:05:20 Ephraim Anierobi wrote:
> > Awesome work! Thank you, Jarek and Pavan!
> >
> > - Ephraim
> >
> > On Sat, 4 Jan 2025 at 13:45, Shahar Epstein <sha...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Well done Jarek and Pavan!
> > >
> > > Shahar
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 30, 2024 at 12:15 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello here,
> > > >
> > > > TL;DR; I just merged https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/45266 -
> > > > which implemented a much simplified and nicer workflow for our CI.
> > > >
> > > > Rebase to the latest `main` and you should be good to go.
> > > >
> > > > It (finally) switches o from a workflow we had for years (using
> pretty
> > > > dangerous from the security point of view `pull_request_target`
> > > workflow) -
> > > > into using Artifacts for sharing images in workflow. This was
> possible
> > > > thanks to new "artifacts" actions and switching to UV.
> > > >
> > > > The benefit of it is that it is way safer - no more "dangerous
> workflows"
> > > > and simpler - we have a lot simpler Dockerfile.ci and caching
> mechanism
> > > > implemented. We worked this out by discussing with other ASF
> projects and
> > > > actually even reusing an action developed by a fellow Apache Arrow
> > > > committer and PMC member - Jacob Wujciak.
> > > >
> > > > The things everyone should do:
> > > >
> > > > * rebase your PR to latest main to make your PRs rebuilt using the
> new
> > > > workflow
> > > > * run `breeze ci-image build` if you are using breeze locally
> > > >
> > > > I expect some teething problems, so do not hesitate to raise your
> > > problems
> > > > in #internal-airflow-ci-cd channel for CI or #airflow-breeze channel
> if
> > > you
> > > > see breeze problems
> > > >
> > > > Your regular workflows should continue working as usual, you should
> see
> > > > just one workflow in CI running builds and tests instead of two.
> > > >
> > > > J.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@airflow.apache.org
>
>
