+1 (binding) - Checked reproducible package build, svn, licences, and signatures
On Thu, 19 Feb 2026 at 23:39, Pavankumar Gopidesu <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 non-binding. > > Verified a few example dags, it's working fine. > > And Big thank you Jarek, for all the effort on this release :) > > Regards, > Pavan > > On Thu, Feb 19, 2026 at 10:34 PM Jens Scheffler <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi Jarek, > > > > Had a bit of challenges running the validation stages on the aged > > descriptions, attempted in a different, clean workspace but ended up > > requiring having it in /airflow... but anyway, result of my checks are: > > > > Airflow 2.11.1rc2 > > > > +1 (binding) - Checked SVN, Reproducible package build, Licenses, > > Signatures > > > > *Note that also the license check raised alarms which were > > false-positives. But had no differences in generated packages as of > > previous eamils made "git clean -xddf" before starting to check. > > > > Fab 1.5.4rc1: > > > > +1 (binding) - Checked SVN, Check in Docker, Reproducible package build, > > Licenses, Signatures > > > > Was a bit of a challenge getting that old release with existing script > > back working and tested. Attempted my usual test round via Edge Executor > > and Integration Test Dag. Actually had in memory that we wanted to block > > EdgeExecutor being possible to be used in 2.11.1 but is still working. > > But anyway for everybody on own risk. > > > > So for me ... let's get this released! Hopefully last time 2.11.*! > > (Validation took me almost 2 of my evenings... not counting the enormous > > hours Jarek spent in making the release. Wow!) > > > > On 18.02.26 23:50, Jarek Potiuk wrote: > > > That's fine - those are all generated files, just missing (due to > **old** > > > release tooling from exclusions - we are not supposed to have licence > for > > > generated files) > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 18, 2026 at 10:50 PM Buğra Öztürk <[email protected] > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> For apache-airflow, +1 (binding) > > >> I have checked, > > >> - SVN > > >> - Reproducible package builds > > >> - Licence > > >> - Signature > > >> - Checksums > > >> > > >> I have checked with diffoscope and see only that the `generated/` part > > was > > >> different. It is indeed coming from old local builds, where, in > release > > >> checks, we are not mentioning the cleaning generated. We have only > part > > >> related to cleaning the `dist/` directory. > > >> > > >> For providers/fab, > > >> I have checked, > > >> - SVN > > >> - Reproducible package builds > > >> - Licence > > >> - Signature > > >> - Checksums > > >> > > >> Other than the Licence check, it looks good. To double-check, I used > > both > > >> apache-rat-0.17 and apache-rat-0.13, as stated in the version docs and > > the > > >> latest. Both showed the files as unapproved. Please let me know if I > > missed > > >> anything. > > >> ``` apache-rat-0.13 > > >> Files with unapproved licenses: > > >> > > >> ./apache_airflow_providers_fab-1.5.4-py3-none-any.whl.asc > > >> ./apache_airflow_providers_fab-1.5.4-py3-none-any.whl.sha512 > > >> ./apache_airflow_providers_fab-1.5.4.tar.gz.asc > > >> ./apache_airflow_providers_fab-1.5.4.tar.gz.sha512 > > >> ``` > > >> > > >> ``` apache-rat-0.17 > > >> ***************************************************** > > >> Files with unapproved licenses > > >> ***************************************************** > > >> > > >> /apache_airflow_providers_fab-1.5.4-py3-none-any.whl.asc > > >> /apache_airflow_providers_fab-1.5.4-py3-none-any.whl.sha512 > > >> /apache_airflow_providers_fab-1.5.4.tar.gz.asc > > >> /apache_airflow_providers_fab-1.5.4.tar.gz.sha512 > > >> ``` > > >> > > >> Best regards, > > >> > > >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2026 at 2:23 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> > > >>> No big deal if missing and we can explain the difference being that > one > > >>> file. > > >>> > > >>> I think it could be an artefact of switching branches. This file is > > >>> generated in Airflow 3 and used to check if the file changed - in > > Airflow > > >>> 2's breeze it was not generated at all - because > > >> provider_dependencies.json > > >>> was committed to git repo. So likely what happened when you > > >>> switched branches this file was "left-over". > > >>> > > >>> One way to check it is to run in a newly checked out repo (or > > worktree). > > >>> > > >>> J. > > >>> > > >>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2026 at 1:38 PM Shahar Epstein <[email protected]> > > >> wrote: > > >>>> When running the reproducible package check I got that the file > > >>>> generated/provider_dependencies.json.sha256sum exists in > > >>>> dist/apache_airflow-2.11.1.tar.gz but is missing its equivalent > > >> asf-dist. > > >>>> Did I do something wrong or is it an actual issue? > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Shahar > > >>>> > > >>>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 2:43 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Hey fellow Airflowers, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I have cut Airflow 2.11.1rc2 together with accompanying FAB > 1.5.4rc1. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Notes:: > > >>>>> * Airflow 2.11.1 only supports Python 3.10, 3.11, 3.12 - Python 3.9 > > >>>> support > > >>>>> is dropped (reasons > > >>>>> explained in release notes) > > >>>>> * we have rc2 not rc1 for Airflow as there were fab dependency > issues > > >>>> with > > >>>>> rc1 already in PyPI, so I had to go with rc2 > > >>>>> * I have accidentally published 2.11.1 in PyPI (for now I yanked > it) > > >>> due > > >>>> to > > >>>>> technical glitch during preparation (not enough memory for Docker > for > > >>>> yarn > > >>>>> !!). If rc1 will pass testing, I will just unyank it. In case we > will > > >>>> have > > >>>>> to cancel rc1, we will have to release 2.11.2. > > >>>>> * Documentation is not yet published using the new workflow - I > need > > >> to > > >>>>> make some modifications to fix the workflows for v2-11 branch - > but I > > >>> am > > >>>>> close and I should be able to publish the docs tomorrow. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> This email is calling a vote on both - airflow and fab provider. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> The vote will last at least 72 hours, from Tuesday, February 17, > 2026 > > >>>> 0:00 > > >>>>> UTC > > >>>>> until Friday, February 17, 2026 0:00 UTC, and until 3 binding +1 > > >> votes > > >>>> have > > >>>>> been received. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >> > > > https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=8&iso=20260217T0-00&p1=1440 > > >>>>> Status of testing of the release is kept in > > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/62056 > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Consider this my (binding) +1. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Airflow 2.11.1rc2 is available at: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/airflow/2.11.1rc2/ > > >>>>> > > >>>>> *apache-airflow-2.11.1-source.tar.gz* is a source release that > comes > > >>> with > > >>>>> INSTALL instructions - the source file covers both Airflow and Fab. > > >>>>> *apache-airflow-2.11.1.tar.gz* is the binary Python "sdist" > release. > > >>>>> *apache_airflow-2.11.1-py3-none-any.whl* is the binary Python wheel > > >>>>> "binary" release. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Docker images are available at: > > >>>>> https://hub.docker.com/r/apache/airflow/tags?name=2.11.1rc2 > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Fab provider 1.5.4rc2 is available in: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/airflow/providers/2.11/2026-02-16/ > > >>>>> *apache_airflow_providers_fab-1.5.4.tar.gz* is the binary Python > > >>> "sdist" > > >>>>> release. > > >>>>> *apache_airflow_providers_fab-1.5.4-py3-none-any.whl* is the binary > > >>>> Python > > >>>>> wheel "binary" release > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Public keys are available at: > > >>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/airflow/KEYS > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Please vote accordingly: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> [ ] +1 approve > > >>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion > > >>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Only votes from PMC members are binding, but all members of the > > >>> community > > >>>>> are encouraged to test the release and vote with "(non-binding)". > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Airflow: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> The test procedure for PMC members is described in: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >> > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/v2-11-stable/dev/README_RELEASE_AIRFLOW.md#verify-the-release-candidate-by-pmc-members > > >>>>> The test procedure for contributors and members of the community > who > > >>>> would > > >>>>> like to test this RC is described in: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >> > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/v2-11-stable/dev/README_RELEASE_AIRFLOW.md#verify-the-release-candidate-by-contributors > > >>>>> Note that the way to install airflow with `pip` or `uv` (for Python > > >>> 3.10) > > >>>>> [uv] pip install apache-airflow==2.11.1rc2 --constraint > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >> > > > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/apache/airflow/constraints-2.11.1rc2/constraints-3.10.txt > > >>>>> This should install both: apache-airflow==2.11.1rc2 and > > >>>>> apache-airflow-providers-fab==1.5.4rc1 > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Please note that the version number excludes the `rcX` string, so > > >> it's > > >>>> now > > >>>>> simply 2.11.1. This will allow us to rename the artifact without > > >>>> modifying > > >>>>> the artifact checksums when we actually release. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Release Notes: > > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/2.11.1rc2/RELEASE_NOTES.rst > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Cheers, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> J. > > >>>>> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Bugra Ozturk > > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > >
