AIRFLOW-1764 is design/integration mistake (maybe worth a CVE). But 1765 is not a vulnerability, although *maybe* unexpected behaviour.
Bolke. > On 30 Oct 2017, at 19:51, Chris Riccomini <[email protected]> wrote: > > I marked them as blocker. Still would like to understand how important this > is, though. The API is experimental, so I could see an argument for them > not being blocker provided the vulnerability is limited to experimental > areas. > > On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 11:06 AM, 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:ryan.buckley@bluecore. >> com >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> >>
