Alright so here's the INSTALL file: https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2492
I'm thinking I'll cherry pick this in the 1.8-test branch and tar the whole repo, crank up the RC number and publish to the same location as before. Am I on the right track? Max On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Chris Riccomini <[email protected]> wrote: > Oky.. then I guess we can address the feedback above. Owe you some beers, > Max. > > On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Yep > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > On 27 Jul 2017, at 19:00, Maxime Beauchemin < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > I need to re-package it with build instructions. I'm pretty sure this > > means > > > another vote. I have time carved up to work on this today/tomorrow. > > > > > > Max > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Chris Riccomini < > [email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> IMO, given the level of effort for 1.8.2, and how long it's taken, we > > >> should not be re-voting right now unless something horrific happened > to > > the > > >> release. > > >> > > >> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 9:54 PM, Pavel Martynov <[email protected]> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hi, folks! > > >>> > > >>> AIRFLOW-935 issue marked as resolved and fix version is 1.8.2, but > this > > >>> commit contained in master branch only and not tagged by 1.8.2rc2. > > >>> Can fix of this issue be released in 1.8.2? > > >>> > > >>> 2017-07-26 2:27 GMT+03:00 George Leslie-Waksman < > > >>> [email protected]>: > > >>> > > >>>> I've checked and we are no longer relying on the previous > > >>>> LatestOnlyOperator behavior for any of our DAGs. > > >>>> > > >>>> This is not a dealbreaker (though I will need to keep it in mind). > > >>>> > > >>>> Thanks for asking, > > >>>> --George > > >>>> > > >>>> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 2:50 PM Maxime Beauchemin < > > >>>> [email protected]> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> [AIRFLOW-1296] is part of 1.8.2. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Is this a dealbreaker for 1.8.2? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Max > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 2:40 PM, George Leslie-Waksman < > > >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> I hope that it's not too late for me to chime in but there is a > > >>>> breaking > > >>>>>> change in the behavior of LatestOnlyOperator. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> The change was introduced in > > >>>>>> PR: https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2365 > > >>>>>> Change: 333e0b3 [AIRFLOW-1296] Propagate SKIPPED to all downstream > > >>>> tasks > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Prior to this change, the LatestOnlyOperator would skip direct > > >>>> downstream > > >>>>>> but not indirect downstream; now it skips indirect downstream. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> This breaks the use of LatestOnlyOperator with TriggerRules that > do > > >>> not > > >>>>>> propagate skips. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> --George > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:08 PM Maxime Beauchemin < > > >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> I think I'm gathering a good picture of what is expected here. > > >> I'll > > >>>> try > > >>>>>> to > > >>>>>>> update the Confluence page as I go. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> I'm hoping to get started tomorrow and package it early next > > >> week. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Max > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 6:16 PM, siddharth anand < > > >>> [email protected]> > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> FYI, can anyone pictorially describe the release process (and > > >>> post > > >>>> it > > >>>>>> on > > >>>>>>>> the apache airflow wiki)? I think that would eliminate a lot of > > >>>>>> confusion > > >>>>>>>> in the future and avoid a rehash of this email thread on the > > >> next > > >>>>>>> release. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> -s > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Hitesh Shah < > > >> [email protected] > > >>>> > > >>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> To add, the main source tarball should have instructions to > > >>>>> generate > > >>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>> sdist and bdist versions. Additionally, as part of the > > >> release > > >>>>>> process > > >>>>>>> if > > >>>>>>>>> the plan is to publish to pypi (after the IPMC vote > > >> succeeds), > > >>>> then > > >>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>> appropriate bits also need to be verified/voted upon. There > > >> are > > >>>> not > > >>>>>>>> exactly > > >>>>>>>>> counted as the official release bits but they do need to be > > >>>>> verified > > >>>>>> as > > >>>>>>>>> part of the voting process to ensure that the bits do indeed > > >>> map > > >>>> to > > >>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>> source release, license/notice files are correct, etc. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> thanks > > >>>>>>>>> -- Hitesh > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Bolke de Bruin < > > >>>>> [email protected]> > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks Hitesh. We discussed it with John Ament on the IPMC. > > >>>>> Python > > >>>>>>> has > > >>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>> notion of 3 types of distributions, “source”, “sdist”, > > >>> “bdist”, > > >>>>>>>> contrary > > >>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>> Java that knows only two (source, bdist). We used to vote > > >> on > > >>>>>> “sdist”, > > >>>>>>>>> which > > >>>>>>>>>> was deemed incorrect. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> So, Max, indeed we need to vote on a tar.gz that contains > > >>> build > > >>>>>>>>>> instructions in INSTALL to get to “sdist”. The build > > >>>> instructions > > >>>>>>>> should > > >>>>>>>>>> also contain instruction how to run the license checks by > > >>>> Apache > > >>>>>> Rat. > > >>>>>>>>> Most > > >>>>>>>>>> of the work probably goes in the build instructions and > > >>>> verifying > > >>>>>>> they > > >>>>>>>>>> work, but it should not be much. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Any other clarification required? > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Bolke > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> with best regards, Pavel Martynov > > >>> > > >> > > >
