K, I will plan on cutting an alpha1 later this week. Something for you guys to play with.
On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]> wrote: > hi Chris, > > We are still running pre alpha. I am a bit preoccupied with preparing for > a conference and the team is readying a release of one of our core > products. So it will probably will be after this week when I get my hands > dirty again. > > Cheers > Bolke > > Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad > > > Op 4 okt. 2017 om 23:35 heeft Chris Riccomini <[email protected]> > het volgende geschreven: > > > > Hey all, > > > > Checking in. Has anyone tested this in their environments? Stable > releases > > depend on community involvement. > > > > Cheers, > > Chris > > > > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 10:30 PM, Chris Riccomini <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> I've added AIRFLOW-1635 to the v1-9-test branch. It's not in alpha0, but > >> will be included in alpha1. > >> > >>> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 4:13 PM, Feng Lu <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Chris, > >>> > >>> I know it's annoying to have last minute commit com in, but this is a > >>> highly desirable feature for folks using GCP operators, is it possible > to > >>> include AIRFLOW-1635 > >>> <https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/commit/b3e985a3 > >>> 146272ecfd3ceaaa0d8567e4e9e117d4> > >>> in? > >>> More than happy to offer help if there's something I can do. > >>> Thanks a lot. > >>> > >>> Feng > >>> > >>> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Chris Riccomini <[email protected] > > > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hey all, > >>>> > >>>> I have cut a 1.9.0alpha0 release of Airflow. You can download it here: > >>>> > >>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/airflow/1. > 9.0alpha0/ > >>>> > >>>> The bin tarball can be installed with pip: > >>>> > >>>> pip install apache-airflow-1.9.0alpha0+incubating-bin.tar.gz > >>>> > >>>> The goal is to have the community install and run this to expose any > >>> bugs > >>>> before we move on to official release candidates. > >>>> > >>>> Here are the outstanding blocker bugs for 1.9.0: > >>>> > >>>> AIRFLOW-1525 |Improvement |Fix minor LICENSE & NOTICE issue > >>>> AIRFLOW-1258 |Bug |TaskInstances within SubDagOperator are > >>> marked > >>>> as > >>>> AIRFLOW-1055 |Bug |airflow/jobs.py:create_dag_run() > exception > >>>> for > >>>> @on > >>>> AIRFLOW-1018 |Bug |Scheduler DAG processes can not log to > >>> stdout > >>>> AIRFLOW-1013 |Bug |airflow/jobs.py:manage_slas() exception > >>> for > >>>> @once > >>>> AIRFLOW-976 |Bug |Mark success running task causes it to > fail > >>>> > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> Chris > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Chris Riccomini < > [email protected] > >>>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Welp. Work got in the way, so I'll cut the beta on Monday. :) > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Chris Riccomini < > >>> [email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Works for me. Will try and cut a beta before end of week. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Blockers for 1.9.0 are: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> AIRFLOW-1611 |Bug |Customize logging in Airflow > >>>>>> AIRFLOW-1525 |Improvement |Fix minor LICENSE & NOTICE issue > >>>>>> AIRFLOW-1258 |Bug |TaskInstances within SubDagOperator are > >>>> marked > >>>>>> as > >>>>>> AIRFLOW-976 |Bug |Mark success running task causes it to > >>> fail > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Chris > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Can I suggest releasing a beta? The stable branch is only cut at RC > >>>>>>> time. Betas allow us a broader exposure. It also gives us a point > of > >>>>>>> reference. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> In addition the list below are mostly longer standing issues that > >>> are > >>>>>>> also part of the 1.8.x branch. Maybe only consider 1611, 1525, > 1258, > >>>> and > >>>>>>> 976 as blocker? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Cheers > >>>>>>> Bolke > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Op 28 sep. 2017 om 19:49 heeft Chris Riccomini < > >>>> [email protected]> > >>>>>>> het volgende geschreven: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Hey all, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I was planning to cut a 1.9.0 stable branch and 1.9.0 beta > >>> release, > >>>> but > >>>>>>>> seeing as there are several outstanding bugs, I'm going to delay. > >>>> Here > >>>>>>> are > >>>>>>>> the bugs that I'm tracking: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1611 |Bug |Customize logging in Airflow > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1525 |Improvement |Fix minor LICENSE & NOTICE issue > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1258 |Bug |TaskInstances within SubDagOperator are > >>>>>>> marked as > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1055 |Bug |airflow/jobs.py:create_dag_run() > >>>> exception > >>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>> @on > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1018 |Bug |Scheduler DAG processes can not log to > >>>>>>> stdout > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-1013 |Bug |airflow/jobs.py:manage_slas() > >>> exception > >>>>>>> for @once > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-988 |Bug |SLA Miss Callbacks Are Repeated if > >>> Email > >>>> is > >>>>>>> Not > >>>>>>>> be > >>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-976 |Bug |Mark success running task causes it to > >>>> fail > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> These are the priority issues. Once they're merged, I'll cut the > >>>>>>>> v1-9-stable and beta release. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> If you can help clean this up, that would be really appreciated. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>> Chris > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Chris Riccomini < > >>>>>>> [email protected]> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Marked it for 1.9.0. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Charlie Jones < > >>> [email protected]> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Is there any chance we could include AIRFLOW-988 in 1.9.0? SLA > >>>>>>> callbacks > >>>>>>>>>> are not working correctly without emails... Its not a major bug, > >>>> but > >>>>>>> it > >>>>>>>>>> does cause us some annoyance in our current deployment. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Link to Jira: > >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-988 > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Link to PR: > >>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2415 > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks! > >>>>>>>>>> Charlie Jones > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> CHARLIE JONES > >>>>>>>>>> Data Engineer > >>>>>>>>>> [email protected] | M: 972.821.7631 > >>>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________ > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Programmatic Performance.* Localized.* > >>>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________ > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 1407 Texas Street | Suite 202 | Fort Worth, TX 76102 > >>>>>>>>>> 800.840.0768 | www.simpli.fi > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Chris Riccomini < > >>>>>>> [email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Merged. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Ryan Buckley < > >>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Would it be possible to include AIRFLOW-1587? > >>>>>>>>>>>> Running dags from the UI is currently broken on the 1.9.0 > >>> branch > >>>>>>> due > >>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>> this issue. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2590 > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>>>>>> Ryan > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 8:14 AM, Driesprong, Fokko > >>>>>>>>>> <[email protected] > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi All, > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to include AIRFLOW-1611 in the 1.9.0 release: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2631 > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently importing a custom logging configuration is not > >>> work > >>>> (as > >>>>>>>>>> far > >>>>>>>>>>>> as I > >>>>>>>>>>>>> know). Any feedback on the PR would also be appreciated. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, Fokko > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-09-25 23:27 GMT+02:00 Chris Riccomini < > >>>> [email protected] > >>>>>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Done! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 5:11 AM, Michael Crawford < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you slide the aws and emr connection type fix in? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1636 < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1636> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2626 < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2626> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It keeps the connection type from getting blanked out on > >>> edit > >>>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>> these > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> types. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 21, 2017, at 1:27 PM, Chris Riccomini < > >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Absolutely. Just cherry-picked. I've been looking forward > >>> to > >>>>>>>>>>> these > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 5:23 PM, Alex Guziel < > >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] > >>>>>>>>>>>>> . > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> invalid > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can we get this in? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1519 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1621 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/commit/ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> b6d2e0a46978e93e16576604624f57d1388814f2 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/commit/ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 656d045e90bf67ca484a3778b2a07a419bfb324a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It speeds up loading times a lot, so it's a good thing to > >>>>>>>>>> have > >>>>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.9. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Chris Riccomini < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds good. I'll plan on stable+beta next week, then. > >>>>>>>>>> Initial > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> warning > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stands, that I will start locking down what can get into > >>>>>>>>>> 1.9.0 > >>>>>>>>>>> at > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> point. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:10 AM, Bolke de Bruin < > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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_ru > >>>>>>>>>> n() > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> >
