@Bolke, thanks for creating the branch! Your plan sounds good to me. Re: deleting airbnb branches, I'll leave Dan/Max/Paul/Arthur/etc to comment on that. :)
On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 7:59 AM, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Chris, > > I have created branch “v1-8-test”. For now I want to keep master and > v1-8-test in sync and do not do any cherry picking. The reason for this is > that we have a lot of catching up to do between 1.7.1.3 and 1.8.0, next to > that master is (at least to me) in an unknown state. If someone has a > better way to do this I am open to suggestions. > > When we release 1.8.0 I will create branch v-1-8-stable. This should track > point releases (e.g., 1.8.1, 1.8.2). > > On a side note I have deleted many old branches. This is what is left: > > remotes/apache/airbnb_rb1.7.1 > remotes/apache/airbnb_rb1.7.1_2 > remotes/apache/airbnb_rb1.7.1_3 > remotes/apache/airbnb_rb1.7.1_4 > remotes/apache/master > remotes/apache/v1-8-test > > I would like to remove the Airbnb branches as well. Can I? Maybe leave one > in as it reflect 1.7.1.3? (Which one?) > > - Bolke > > > > On 3 Jan 2017, at 20:34, Chris Riccomini <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hey Bolke, > > > > Thanks for taking this on. I'm definitely up for running stuff in our > > environments to verify everything is working. > > > > Can I ask that you create a 1.8 alpha 1 branch in the git repo? This will > > make it easier for us to track what changes are getting cherry picked > into > > the branch, and will also make it easier for users to pip install, if > they > > want to do so via github. > > > > Also, yea, when we switch to beta, we need to stop merging anything other > > than bug fixes into the release branch. > > > > Cheers, > > Chris > > > > On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 10:31 AM, Dan Davydov <[email protected]. > invalid > >> wrote: > > > >> All very reasonable to me, one reason we may not have hit the bugs in > our > >> production is because we are running off a different merge base and our > >> cherries aren't 1-1 with what we are running in production (we still > test > >> them but we can't run them in production), that being said I don't > think I > >> authored the commits you are referring to so I don't have full context. > >> > >> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Dan et al, > >>> > >>> That sounds good to me, however I will be pretty critical of the > changes > >>> in the scheduler and the cleanliness of the patches. This is due to the > >>> fact I have been chasing quite some bugs in master that were pretty > hard > >> to > >>> track down even with a debugger at hand. I’m surprised that those > didn’t > >>> pop up in your production or maybe I am concerned ;-). Anyways, I hope > >> you > >>> understand I might be a bit picky in understanding and needing (design) > >>> documentation for some of the changes. > >>> > >>> What I would like to suggest is that for the Alpha versions we still > >>> accept “new” features so these PRs can get in, but from Beta we will > not > >>> accept new features anymore. For new features in the area of the > >> scheduler > >>> an integration DummyDag should be supplied, so others can test the > >>> behaviour. Does this sound ok? > >>> > >>> My list of open code items for a release looks now like this: > >>> > >>> Blockers > >>> * one_failed not honoured > >>> * Alex’s sensor issue > >>> > >>> New features: > >>> * Schedule all pending DAGs in a single loop > >>> * Add support for backfill true/false > >>> * Impersonation > >>> * CGroups > >>> * Add Cloud Storage updated sensor > >>> > >>> Alpha2 I will package tomorrow. Packages are signed now by my > apache.org > >> < > >>> http://apache.org/> key. Please verify and let me know if something is > >>> off. I’m still waiting for access to the incubating dist repository. > >>> > >>> Bolke > >>> > >>> > >>>> On 3 Jan 2017, at 14:38, Dan Davydov <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> I have also started on this effort, recently Alex Guziel and I have > >> been > >>>> pushing Airbnb's custom cherries onto master to get Airbnb back onto > >>> master > >>>> in order for us to do a release. > >>>> > >>>> I think it might make sense to wait for these two commits to get > merged > >>> in > >>>> since they would be quite nice to have for all Airflow users and seem > >>> like > >>>> they will be merged soon: > >>>> Schedule all pending DAG runs in a single scheduler loop - > >>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1906 < > >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1906> > >>>> Add Support for dag.backfill=(True|False) Option - > >>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1830 < > >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1830> > >>>> Impersonation Support + Cgroups - https://github.com/apache/ < > >>> https://github.com/apache/> > >>>> incubator-airflow/pull/1934 (this is kind of important from the Airbnb > >>> side > >>>> so that we can help test the new master without having to cherrypick > >> this > >>>> PR on top of it which would make the testing unreliable for others). > >>>> > >>>> If there are PRs that affect the core of Airflow that other committers > >>>> think are important to merge we could include these too. I can commit > >> to > >>>> pushing out the Impersonation/Cgroups PR this week pending PR > comments. > >>>> What do you think Bolke? > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 4:26 AM, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected] > >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hey Alex, > >>>>> > >>>>> I have noticed the same, and it is also the reason why we have Alpha > >>>>> versions. For now I have noticed the following: > >>>>> > >>>>> * Tasks can get in limbo between scheduler and executor: > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1948 < > >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1948> < > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1948 < > >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1948>> > >>>>> * Try_number not increased due to reset in LocalTaskJob: > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1969 < > >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1969> < > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1969 < > >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1969>> > >>>>> * one_failed trigger not executed > >>>>> > >>>>> My idea is to move to a Samba style of releases eventually, but for > >> now > >>> I > >>>>> would like to get master into a state that we understand and > therefore > >>> not > >>>>> accept any patches that do not address any bugs. > >>>>> > >>>>> If you (or anyone else) can review the above PRs and add your own as > >>> well > >>>>> then I can create another Alpha version. I’ll be on gitter as much as > >> I > >>> can > >>>>> so we can speed up if needed. > >>>>> > >>>>> - Bolke > >>>>> > >>>>>> On 3 Jan 2017, at 08:51, Alex Van Boxel <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hey Bolke, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> thanks for getting this moving. But I already have some blockers, > >>> since I > >>>>>> moved up master to this release (moved from end November to now) > >>>>> stability > >>>>>> has gone down (certainly on Celary). I'm trying to identify the core > >>>>>> problems and see if I can fix them. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 9:52 PM Bolke de Bruin <[email protected] > >>>>> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Dear All, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On the verge of the New Year, I decided to be a little bit cheeky > and > >>> to > >>>>>> make available an Airflow 1.8.0 Alpha 1. We have been talking about > >> it > >>>>> for > >>>>>> a long time now and by doing this I wanted bootstrap the process. It > >>>>> should > >>>>>> by no means be considered an Apache release yet. This is for testing > >>>>>> purposes in the dev community around Airflow, nothing else. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The build is exactly the same as the state of master (git 410736d) > >> plus > >>>>> the > >>>>>> change to version “1.8.0.alpha1” in version.py. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I am dedicating quite some time next week and beyond to get a > release > >>>>> out. > >>>>>> Hopefully we can get some help with testing, changelog etc. To make > >>> this > >>>>>> possible I would like to propose a freeze to adding new features for > >> at > >>>>>> least two weeks - say until Jan 15. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> You can find the tar here: http://people.apache.org/~bolke/ < > >>> http://people.apache.org/~bolke/> < > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~bolke/ <http://people.apache.org/~bolke/> > >> < > >>> http://people.apache.org/~bolke/ <http://people.apache.org/~bolke/>>> > . > >>>>> It isn’t signed. Following versions > >>>>>> will be. SHA is available. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Lastly, Alpha 1 does not have the fix for retries yet. So we will > get > >>> an > >>>>>> Alpha 2 :-). @Max / @Dan / @Paul: a potential fix is in > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1948 < > >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1948> < > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1948 < > >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1948>> < > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1948 < > >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1948> < > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1948 < > >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/1948>>> , but your > >>>>> feedback > >>>>>> is required as it is entrenched in new processing code that you are > >>>>> running > >>>>>> in production afaik - so I wonder what happens in your fork. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Happy New Year! > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Bolke > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> _/ > >>>>>> _/ Alex Van Boxel > >>> > >>> > >> > >
