No vote indeed, just to gather feedback on a particular fixed point in time. It also gives a bit more trust to a tarball than to a git pull.
Bolke > On 20 Sep 2017, at 20:09, Chris Riccomini <[email protected]> wrote: > > I can do a beta. Is the process significantly different? IIRC, it's > basically the same, just no vote, right? > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Are you sure you want to go ahead and do RCs right away? Isn’t a beta a >> bit smarter? >> >> - Bolke >> >>> On 20 Sep 2017, at 19:41, Chris Riccomini <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hey all, >>> >>> I want to send out a warning that I'm planning to cut the stable branch >>> next week, and begin the RC1 release vote. Once the stable branch is >> cut, I >>> will be locking down what commits get cherry picked into the branch, and >>> will only be doing PRs that are required to get the release out. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Chris >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Chris Riccomini <[email protected] >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hey all, >>>> >>>> An update on the 1.9.0 release. Here are the outstanding PRs that are >>>> slated to be included into 1.9.0: >>>> >>>> ISSUE ID |STATUS |DESCRIPTION >>>> AIRFLOW-1617 |Open |XSS Vulnerability in Variable endpoint >>>> AIRFLOW-1611 |Open |Customize logging in Airflow >>>> AIRFLOW-1605 |Reopened |Fix log source of local loggers >>>> AIRFLOW-1604 |Open |Rename the logger to log >>>> AIRFLOW-1525 |Open |Fix minor LICENSE & NOTICE issue >>>> AIRFLOW-1499 |In Progres|Eliminate duplicate and unneeded code >>>> AIRFLOW-1198 |Open |HDFSOperator to operate HDFS >>>> AIRFLOW-1055 |Open |airflow/jobs.py:create_dag_run() exception for >>>> @on >>>> AIRFLOW-1019 |Open |active_dagruns shouldn't include paused DAGs >>>> AIRFLOW-1018 |Open |Scheduler DAG processes can not log to stdout >>>> AIRFLOW-1015 |Open |TreeView displayed over task instances >>>> AIRFLOW-1013 |Open |airflow/jobs.py:manage_slas() exception for >>>> @once >>>> AIRFLOW-976 |Open |Mark success running task causes it to fail >>>> AIRFLOW-914 |Open |Refactor BackfillJobTest.test_backfill_ >> examples >>>> to >>>> AIRFLOW-913 |Open |Refactor tests.CoreTest.test_scheduler_job to >>>> real >>>> AIRFLOW-912 |Open |Refactor tests and build matrix >>>> AIRFLOW-888 |Open |Operators should not push XComs by default >>>> AIRFLOW-828 |Open |Add maximum size for XComs >>>> AIRFLOW-825 |Open |Add Dataflow semantics >>>> AIRFLOW-788 |Open |Context unexpectedly added to hive conf >>>> >>>> I will be locking down what can get cherry-picked into the 1.9.0 branch >>>> shortly, so if you have something you want in, please set the fix >> version >>>> to 1.9.0. >>>> >>>> We (at WePay) have deployed 1.9.0 into our dev cluster, and it has been >>>> running smoothly for several days. >>>> >>>> ** I could really use help verifying stability. If you run Airflow, it's >>>> in your best interest to deploy the 1.9.0 test branch somewhere, and >> verify >>>> it's working for your workload. ** >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Chris >>>> >> >>
