Gotcha. I can relate to that. With hindsight the backfill change should not 
have made it into the RC cycle. Any way I hope you guys can jump on the wagon 
pretty soon again: I do think 1.8.1 is in a lot better shape than 1.8.0. It 
would be nice if you guys could take on 1.8.2.

And as mentioned if it has to do with “backfill” for the moment I feel my name 
is tagged on that.

- Bolke

> On 4 May 2017, at 21:27, Dan Davydov <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Thinking back it may have been 1.8.0rc5-> 1.8.0 regressions. I am still 
> worried about the large number of PRs in 1.8.1 even if they are all bug fixes 
> though (known issues that we already have patches for vs unknown new issues 
> introduced with the 1.8.1 patches) , but I agree with your sentiment that 
> these PRs should most likely make things more stable.
> 
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Alex Guziel <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> I don't think any of the fixes I did were regressions.
> 
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:11 AM, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> I know of one that Alex wanted to get in, but wasn’t targeted for 1.8.1 in 
> Jira and thus didn’t make the cut at RC time. There is is another one out 
> that seems to have stalled a bit 
> (https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2205 
> <https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2205>).
> 
> Reading the changelog of 1.8.1 I see bug fixes, apache requirements and one 
> “new” feature (UI lightning bolt). Regressions could have happened but we 
> have been quite vigilant on the fact that these bug fixes needed proper 
> tests, so I am very interested in 1.8.0 -> 1.8.1 regressions. If it is a 
> pre-backfill-change 1.8.0 to 1.8.1 regression then I would also like to know, 
> cause I made that change and feel responsible for it.
> 
> Cheers
> Bolke
> 
> 
>> On 3 May 2017, at 22:13, Dan Davydov <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> 
>> cc Alex and Rui who were working on fixes, I'm not sure if their commits got 
>> in before 1.8.1.
>> 
>> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> Hi Dan,
>> 
>> (Thread renamed to make sure it does not clash, dev@ now added)
>> 
>> It surprises me that you found regression from 1.8.0 to 1.8.1 as 1.8.1 is 
>> very much focused on bug fixes. Were the regressions shared yet? 
>> 
>> The whole 1.8.X release will be bug fix focused (per release management) and 
>> minor feature updates. The 1.9.0 release will be the first release with 
>> major feature updates. So what you want, more robustness and focus on 
>> stability, is now underway. I agree with beefing up tests and including the 
>> major operators in this. Executors should also be on this list btw. Turning 
>> on coverage reporting might be a first step in helping this (it isn’t the 
>> solution obviously).
>> 
>> Cheers
>> Bolke
>> 
>> 
>>> On 3 May 2017, at 20:28, Dan Davydov <[email protected] 
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> We saw several regressions moving from 1.8.0 to 1.8.1 the first time we 
>>> tried, and while I think we merged all our fixes to master (not sure if 
>>> they all made it into 1.8.1 however), we have put releasing on hold due to 
>>> stability issues from the last couple of releases. It's either the case 
>>> that:
>>> A) Airbnb requires more robustness from new releases.
>>> or
>>> B) Most companies using Airflow require more robustness and we should halt 
>>> on feature work until we are more confident in our testing
>>> 
>>> I think the biggest problem currently is the lack of unit testing coverage, 
>>> e.g. when the backfill framework was refactored (which was the right 
>>> long-term fix), it caused a lot of breakages that weren't caught by tests. 
>>> I think we need to audit the major operators/classes and beef up the unit 
>>> testing coverage. The coverage metric does not necessarily cover these 
>>> cases (e.g. cyclomatic complexity). Writing regression tests is good but we 
>>> shouldn't have so many new blocker issues in our releases.
>>> 
>>> We are fighting some fires internally at the moment (not Airflow related), 
>>> but Alex and I have been working on some stuff that we will push to the 
>>> community once we are done. Alex is working on a good solution for python 
>>> package isolation, and I'm working on integration with Kubernetes at the 
>>> executor level.
>>> 
>>> Feel free to forward any of my messages to the dev mailing list.
>>> 
>>> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected] 
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> Grrr, I seriously dislike to send button on the touch bar…here goes again.
>>> 
>>> Hi Dan,
>>> 
>>> (Please note I would like to forward the next message to dev@, but let me 
>>> know if you don’t find it comfortable)
>>> 
>>> I understand your point. The gap between 1.7.1 was large in terms of 
>>> functionality changes etc. It was going to be a (bit?) rough and as you 
>>> guys are using many of the edge cases you probably found more issues than 
>>> any of us. Still, between 1.8.0 and 1.8.1 we have added many tests 
>>> (coverage increased from 67% to close to 69%, which is a lot as you know). 
>>> It would be nice if you can share where your areas of concern are so we can 
>>> address those and a suggestion on how to proceed with integration tests is 
>>> also welcome. 
>>> 
>>> You guys (=Airbnb) have been a bit quiet over the past couple of days, so I 
>>> am getting a bit worried in terms of engagement. Is that warranted?
>>> 
>>> Cheers
>>> Bolke
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 3 May 2017, at 20:13, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected] 
>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi Dan,
>>>> 
>>>> (Please note I would like to forward the next message to dev@, but let me 
>>>> know if you don’t find it comfortable)
>>>> 
>>>> I understand your point. The gap between 1.7.1 was large in terms of 
>>>> functionality changes etc. It was going to be a (bit?) rough and as you 
>>>> guys are using many of the edge cases you probably found more issues than 
>>>> any of us. Still, between 1.8.0 and 1.8.1 we have added many tests 
>>>> (coverage increased from 67
>>>>> On 3 May 2017, at 19:41, Arthur Wiedmer <[email protected] 
>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> As a counterpoint,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I am comfortable voting +1 on this release in the sense that it fixes 
>>>>> some of the issues with 1.8.0. It is unfortunate that we cannot test it 
>>>>> on the Airbnb production for now and we should definitely invest in 
>>>>> increasing testing coverage, but some of the fixes are needed for ease of 
>>>>> use/adoption (See for instance AIRFLOW-832), and this release is a step 
>>>>> in the right direction.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> Arthur
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Dan Davydov <[email protected] 
>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>>> I'm not comfortable voting without doing comprehensive staging and we 
>>>>> aren't comfortable doing an internal lease for now until we fix the state 
>>>>> of unit test coverage and integration tests.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On May 3, 2017 8:42 AM, "Bolke de Bruin" <[email protected] 
>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>>> Hey Guys,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Chris has been preparing the 1.8.1 release and the vote is running for 
>>>>> it. Only one day left though! Would you mind casting your vote? Only 
>>>>> Chris and I have voted binding until so far.
>>>>> 
>>>>> (Please reply to the message on the list, not this message).
>>>>> 
>>>>> Cheers!
>>>>> Bolke
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> From: Chris Riccomini <[email protected] 
>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>>>>>> Subject: [VOTE] Release Airflow 1.8.1 RC2
>>>>>> Date: 1 May 2017 at 19:58:41 GMT+2
>>>>>> To: [email protected] 
>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>> Reply-To: [email protected] 
>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Dear All,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _WARN: The package version for this RC is 1.8.1 (does not include RC2 in
>>>>>> version number). As such, any future 1.8.1 installatinos will have to be
>>>>>> force installed. PIP will not be able to distinguish between RCs and 
>>>>>> final
>>>>>> versions. Again, you'll have to force install the package. This can be 
>>>>>> done
>>>>>> by adding `--force-reinstall` to your `pip install` commands._
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I've made Airflow 1.8.1 RC2 available at:
>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/airflow 
>>>>>> <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/airflow>, public keys 
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> available at 
>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/airflow 
>>>>>> <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/airflow>.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> New issues fixed in 1.8.1 RC2:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1142] SubDAG Tasks Not Executed Even Though All Dependen
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1004] `airflow webserver -D` runs in foreground
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-492] Insert into dag_stats table results into failed ta
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Issues fixed in 1.8.1 RC0/RC1, and included in RC2:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1138] Add licenses to files in scripts directory
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1127] Move license notices to LICENSE instead of NOTICE
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1124] Do not set all task instances to scheduled on back
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1120] Update version view to include Apache prefix
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1062] DagRun#find returns wrong result if external_trigg
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1054] Fix broken import on test_dag
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1050] Retries ignored - regression
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1033] TypeError: can't compare datetime.datetime to None
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1017] get_task_instance should return None instead of th
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1011] Fix bug in BackfillJob._execute() for SubDAGs
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1001] Landing Time shows "unsupported operand type(s) fo
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1000] Rebrand to Apache Airflow instead of Airflow
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-989] Clear Task Regression
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-974] airflow.util.file mkdir has a race condition
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-906] Update Code icon from lightning bolt to file
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-858] Configurable database name for DB operators
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-853] ssh_execute_operator.py stdout decode default to A
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-832] Fix debug server
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-817] Trigger dag fails when using CLI + API
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-816] Make sure to pull nvd3 from local resources
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-815] Add previous/next execution dates to available def
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-813] Fix unterminated unit tests in tests.job (tests/jo
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-812] Scheduler job terminates when there is no dag file
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-806] UI should properly ignore DAG doc when it is None
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-794] Consistent access to DAGS_FOLDER and SQL_ALCHEMY_C
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-785] ImportError if cgroupspy is not installed
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-784] Cannot install with funcsigs > 1.0.0
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-780] The UI no longer shows broken DAGs
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-777] dag_is_running is initlialized to True instead of
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-719] Skipped operations make DAG finish prematurely
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-694] Empty env vars do not overwrite non-empty config v
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-139] Executing VACUUM with PostgresOperator
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-111] DAG concurrency is not honored
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-88] Improve clarity Travis CI reports
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I would like to raise a VOTE for releasing 1.8.1 based on release 
>>>>>> candidate
>>>>>> 2.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Please respond to this email by:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> +1,0,-1 with *binding* if you are a PMC member or *non-binding* if you 
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> not.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Vote will run for 72 hours (ends this Thursday).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> My VOTE: +1 (binding)
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Arthur Wiedmer
>>>>> (Pronouns: He, Him) 
>>>>> Data Engineering, Airbnb
>>>>> www.airbnb.com <http://www.airbnb.com/>
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to