Also - the https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/73038 is green and ready
to review/merge. It keeps both the old way of building images and the new
hardened images. We can still choose (that will be a follow-up) which
images to release. I hope we can reach a consensus on whether to release
the -legacy one (it could have another name as well), so - for now I think
merging this one and getting consensus on hardened images would be useful,
allowing for more voices and discussion afterward.

J.

On Tue, Oct 13, 2026 at 10:09 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote:

> It's a vanity metrics of course but we had 14M downloads in September as
> reported by Dockerhub. Like for other things we do not have more detailed
> data unfortunately.
>
> J.
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2026, 23:58 Vikram Koka via dev <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> I agree that many users may be extending the image and would like to see
>> some data if possible before making this call.
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 3:56 PM Vikram Koka <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > Hmm, what data do we have on the use of our production images?
>> >
>> > For example for 3.3 vs. other versions over the last year?
>> >
>> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 4:09 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> > I’m -5 to publishing the `-legacy` tag though. If someone wants that:
>> >> write your own Dockerfile and build it yourself.  Our prod image should
>> >> not
>> >> try to be everything to everyone.
>> >>
>> >> If we do not publish the legacy image, migration to 3.4 will be harder
>> for
>> >> a number of current users. In the past, there were issues where people
>> >> used
>> >> the image we published.
>> >> Many users extend the image by adding their dependencies, which might
>> >> cause
>> >> issues. The same occurred when we migrated to Bookworm two years ago:
>> >> libraries and dependencies change. Tools work a bit differently.
>> >>
>> >> But yes - we might not publish the image. We could simply tell people,
>> as
>> >> we have done in the past, that they can build their own image instead
>> of
>> >> us
>> >> publishing it ourselves. I am totally open to that.
>> >>
>> >> J.
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 10:23 AM Ash Berlin-Taylor <[email protected]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > I’m +1 to just using latest Debian stable at the start of every minor
>> >> > release (I.e. 3.4.x will always be based on Debian 13)
>> >> >
>> >> > I’m -5 to publishing the `-legacy` tag though. If someone wants that:
>> >> > write your own Dockerfile and build it yourself.  Our prod image
>> should
>> >> not
>> >> > try to be everything to everyone.
>> >> >
>> >> > -ash
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > > On 10 Oct 2026, at 11:02, Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Hello everyone,
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Following the discussion [1], I'd like to call for lazy consensus
>> on
>> >> how
>> >> > > we build the CI and PROD images starting with Airflow 3.4.0:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > * 3.4.0: the CI image and the default PROD images are based on
>> Docker
>> >> > >  Hardened Images (Python prebuilt by Docker) on Debian 13 "trixie".
>> >> > >  The base images are mirrored to
>> ghcr.io/apache/airflow/base/python,
>> >> > >  so building our images needs no registry credentials.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > * 3.4.x: we still publish PROD images built the current way (Python
>> >> > >  compiled from sources by us on Debian 12 "bookworm"), but only
>> under
>> >> a
>> >> > >  new "-legacy" tag suffix (e.g.
>> >> apache/airflow:3.4.0-python3.12-legacy),
>> >> > >  with a deprecation warning printed by the entrypoint.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > * 3.5.0: we drop the legacy images and bookworm entirely.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > * Testing: legacy images are not built in PRs or canary builds. A
>> >> weekly
>> >> > >  scheduled job on main builds them and runs the PROD image checks,
>> and
>> >> > >  they are fully built and tested on the v3-4-test branch and before
>> >> > >  every 3.4.x release.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > The implementation is in
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/73038
>> >> .
>> >> > > Breeze can build either flavor ("--image-flavor hardened|legacy",
>> >> > > "--debian-version trixie|bookworm"); the CI image is always
>> hardened
>> >> > > and trixie-based.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Two follow-ups will occur after this one merged:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > * integrating -legacy in CI/release framework
>> >> > > * security: signing our images cryptographically
>> >> > >
>> >> > > The last point is the benefit of using hardened images: they are
>> >> already
>> >> > > cryptographically signed, our images can build on top of that and
>> >> > > will be signed as well. with provenance information
>> >> > > so that our users will know the images were built using our secured
>> >> > > environment. I will implement this change by adding
>> >> > > a secure environment for all parts of the release process.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > The lazy consensus will last 72 hours, until 2026-10-13 18:00 UTC.
>> If
>> >> > > there are no objections by then, I will consider it accepted.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > [1]
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/y0mlxsx36kzc84tn31q1kyl4rdvgv1xx
>> >> > >
>> >> > > J.
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>>
>

Reply via email to