+1

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:08 AM Joy Gao <[email protected]> wrote:

> The new FAB UI does not modify the existing API (i.e. www2/api/ will be a
> copy of www/api/), and the endpoints are registered as blueprints to the
> flask app the same way as before, so it is fully backward compatible.
>
> Although FAB offers REST APIs on the models out-of-the-box, it currently is
> still in BETA and does not support any HTTP authentication scheme, meaning
> it would require a cookie to mimic a normal user session in order to be
> used. In the long run (for Airflow 2.X+), I believe the best approach is to
> patch FAB with auth backends, so we can apply @has_access annotation on all
> rest endpoints to streamline authentication.  For 1.10, the current plan is
> to leave the API as is. I wouldn't recommend folks to use the FAB-based
> REST APIs yet. I would also like to release the new UI as an alpha version,
> and wait for 2.0 before promoting it to the default version. This will give
> us some time to address any new UI bugs which I overlooked.
>
> +1 on polishing! (With the exception of "*Rest Api should standardise and
> have proper swagger definitions" and any other bugs that require major
> overhaul*, which I think can wait until 2.0)
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 12:18 PM, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Chris, Joy,
> >
> > Can you shed some light on the backward compatibility of the new UI,
> > particularly with regards to the API? The API for example cannot use the
> > login from FAB afaik.
> >
> > As much of the work is already in for 1.10 I think focus should be on
> > polishing. There are some minor quirks and slightly annoying bugs.
> >
> > - It seems a dag with schedule “none” can still run when turned on from
> > the UI (unconfirmed)
> > - Exceptions are swallowed when importing a custom logging conf
> > - UI only displays UTC
> > - Logging ends up duplicated (fixed in master)
> > - Tasks instantiated outside airflow do not set default time zone
> (@msumit)
> > - Log file retrieval feels archaic (non local?)
> > - Rest Api should standardise and have proper swagger definitions
> >
> > And probably some others.
> >
> > Bolke
> >
> > > On 14 Jan 2018, at 15:41, Driesprong, Fokko <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I think 1.10 is a good idea. I'm working on this refactoring of the
> > sensor
> > > structure: https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2875
> > >
> > > Would be awesome to get this in. At my current project we use sensors
> in
> > a
> > > few places, but still there is some work to be done. For example, don't
> > > allocate an executor slot to the sensors, but have a more sophisticated
> > way
> > > of poking.
> > >
> > > Cheers, Fokko
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 2018-01-12 21:19 GMT+01:00 Chris Riccomini <[email protected]>:
> > >
> > >> Just the operator (AIRFLOW-1517)
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:21 AM, Anirudh Ramanathan <
> > >> [email protected]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Sounds awesome. Is k8s support here referring to both the executor
> and
> > >> the
> > >>> operator?
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Jan 12, 2018 11:18 AM, "Sid Anand" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> +1
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Chris Riccomini <
> > >> [email protected]
> > >>>>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Hey all,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> After some past discussion on Airflow 1.10 vs 2.0, I think we've
> > >>>> converged
> > >>>>> on a 1.10 as the next step. 1.10 will include:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> * Timezone changes
> > >>>>> * Kubernetes support
> > >>>>> * New UI
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The first two have been merged in, as I saw Bolke just merged K8s
> (I
> > >>> saw
> > >>>> a
> > >>>>> few follow-on patches coming, though), and I think the new UI is
> > >>>> probably a
> > >>>>> couple of weeks out from a PR on master.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> What do people think of starting the release process on master in
> > >> Feb?
> > >>>>> Given that it took a month last time, I expect 1.10 to be released
> in
> > >>>>> March. Thoughts?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>> Chris
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to