I consider AIRFLOW-1765 to be invalid. Airflow ships out-of-the-box without 
authentication. Whether we keep it this way is up for discussion, but it is not 
a blocker.

Bolke


> On 30 Oct 2017, at 19:06, Ash Berlin-Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> I think we need to add 
> 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1764
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1765 
> 
> to that list as critical security fixes. I'll tackled 1765 tomorrow (UK time) 
> if no one gets round to it before then.
> 
> -ash
> 
>> On 30 Oct 2017, at 17:58, Chris Riccomini <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> Hey all,
>> 
>> Current blockers for 1.9.0:
>> 
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1711
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1018
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Chris
>> 
>> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Chris Riccomini <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hey all,
>>> 
>>> Talked with @Bolke on Gitter. Here are the currently blocking issues for
>>> 1.9.0:
>>> 
>>> AIRFLOW-1744      |Bug         ||Blocker   ||Open      |task.retries can
>>> be False
>>> AIRFLOW-1731      |Bug         ||Blocker   ||Open      |Import custom
>>> config on PYTHONPATH
>>> AIRFLOW-1641      |Bug         ||Blocker   ||In Progress|Task gets stuck
>>> in queued state
>>> 
>>> PRs are out for them. After these three are merged, I'm planning to cut an
>>> RC.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Chris
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 7:49 AM, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I upgraded our production environment today. Some observations
>>>> 
>>>> 1. Database migration (add max tries) didn’t workout of the box correctly
>>>> for Postgres. “max_tries = False” didn’t work and needed to be casted to an
>>>> int. Not sure how this gets to be false. This is a block imho
>>>> 2. SSHExecuteOperator not having backwards compatibility sucks. We needed
>>>> to rework quite a lot of dags
>>>> 3. We use LdAP for logins. We havent configured the ‘superuser’
>>>> ‘data_profiler’ groups and thus should have automatic superuser privileges.
>>>> We don’t at the moment (eg. we cannot manage connections or see the admin
>>>> screens).
>>>> 
>>>> After fixing #1, the rest seems quite normal. Happy with the new logging.
>>>> 
>>>> Bolke
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 20 Oct 2017, at 12:16, Driesprong, Fokko <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Bolke,
>>>>> 
>>>>> This one is a blocker: https://issues.apache.org/jira
>>>> /browse/AIRFLOW-1731.
>>>>> 
>>>>> This requirers that we are sure that the /plugin/ folder is on the path:
>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/blob/eb2f589099b
>>>> 87743482c2eb16261b49e284dcd96/airflow/plugins_manager.py
>>>>> 
>>>>> And maybe add an additional test and updating the docs a bit. Hopefully
>>>>> somewhere in the next few days, however I'm a bit busy with the Spark
>>>>> Summit.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Cheers, Fokko
>>>>> 
>>>>> 2017-10-19 21:03 GMT+02:00 Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]>:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Im planning to upgrade our production to 1.9.0alphaX tomorrow.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> What are the issues that are open?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>> Bolke
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 9 Oct 2017, at 20:24, Chris Riccomini <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 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]
>>>>>> <mailto:[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]
>>>>>> <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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 <
>>>>>> 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] <mailto:[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/ <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] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Marked it for 1.9.0.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Charlie Jones <
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[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 <
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-988>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Link to PR:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2415 <
>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2415>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Charlie Jones
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CHARLIE JONES
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Data Engineer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>  |  M:
>>>>>> 972.821.7631 <tel:972.821.7631>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Programmatic Performance.* Localized.*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1407 Texas Street  |  Suite 202  |  Fort Worth, TX 76102
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 800.840.0768 <tel:800.840.0768>  |  www.simpli.fi <
>>>>>> http://www.simpli.fi/>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Chris Riccomini <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Merged.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Ryan Buckley <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[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 <
>>>>>> 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 <
>>>>>> 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] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Done!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 5:11 AM, Michael Crawford <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] <mailto:
>>>>>> [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://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> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> invalid
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can we get this in?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1519 <
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1519>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1621 <
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1621>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/commit/
>>>> <
>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/commit/>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> b6d2e0a46978e93e16576604624f57d1388814f2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/commit/
>>>> <
>>>>>> 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] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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] <mailto:
>>>> [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
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
> 

Reply via email to