Both blockers have been merged. Are we ready for an RC? On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 11:55 AM, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >
