Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.0 from 2.9.0rc2

2024-04-04 Thread Jarek Potiuk
+1 (binding) - checked reproducibility, signatures, checksums, licences - > all good. Installed it, run a few dags, clicked through a number of screens. All looks good. Also verified the final package and it looks good with the right FAB >=1.0.2 dependency. All looks good. On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at

Re: [DISCUSS] Consider disabling self-hosted runners for commiter PRs

2024-04-04 Thread Ferruzzi, Dennis
Interested in seeing the difference, +1 - ferruzzi From: Oliveira, Niko Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2024 2:00 PM To: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] [COURRIEL EXTERNE] [DISCUSS] Consider disabling self-hosted runners for commiter PRs CAUTION:

[VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.0 from 2.9.0rc2

2024-04-04 Thread Ephraim Anierobi
Hey fellow Airflowers, I have cut Airflow 2.9.0rc2. This email is calling a vote on the release, which will last at least 52 hours, from Thursday, April 4, 2024, at 9:00 pm UTC until Sunday, April 7, 2024, at 1:00 am UTC

Re: [DISCUSS] Consider disabling self-hosted runners for commiter PRs

2024-04-04 Thread Oliveira, Niko
+1I'd love to see this as well. In the past, stability and long queue times of PR builds have been very frustrating. I'm not 100% sure this is due to using self hosted runners, since 35 queue depth (to my mind) should be plenty. But something about that setup has never seemed quite right to me

Re: [DISCUSS] Consider disabling self-hosted runners for commiter PRs

2024-04-04 Thread Pankaj Koti
+1 from me to this idea. Sounds very reasonable to me. At times, my experience has been better with public runners instead of self-hosted runners :) And like already mentioned in the discussion, I think having the ability of a applying the label "use-self-hosted-runners" to be used for critical

[DISCUSS] Consider disabling self-hosted runners for commiter PRs

2024-04-04 Thread Jarek Potiuk
Hello everyone, TL;DR With some recent changes in GitHub Actions and the fact that ASF has a lot of runners available donated for all the builds, I think we could experiment with disabling "self-hosted" runners for committer builds. The self-hosted runners of ours have been extremely helpful

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.0 from 2.9.0rc1

2024-04-04 Thread Ephraim Anierobi
Hey fellow Airflowers, I'm canceling this vote due to the above bug report and will create an RC2 soon. - Ephraim On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 at 11:49, Rahul Vats wrote: > I am getting below traceback in migration pod when trying to downgrade. > > Traceback (most recent call last): > File

[RESULT][VOTE] AIP-62 Getting Lineage from Hook Instrumentation

2024-04-04 Thread Maciej Obuchowski
Hello, The vote for AIP-62 has completed and it has been accepted. 4 "+1" binding votes received: - Maciej Obuchowski - Jarek Potiuk - Phani Kumar - Pankaj Koti 3 "+1" non-binding received: - Jakub Dardziński - Abhishek Bhakat - Ankit Chaurasia Vote thread:

Re: [VOTE] AIP-62 Getting Lineage from Hook Instrumentation

2024-04-04 Thread Ankit Chaurasia
+1 (non-binding). Regards, Ankit Chaurasia On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 4:44 PM Abhishek Bhakat wrote: > > +1 (non-binding) > > Regards, > Avi > > > On Apr 4, 2024, at 10:23, Pankaj Koti > > wrote: > > > > +1 binding. Sounds exciting. > > > > Sorry I missed the discussion earlier. I have some

Re: [VOTE] AIP-62 Getting Lineage from Hook Instrumentation

2024-04-04 Thread Abhishek Bhakat
+1 (non-binding) Regards, Avi > On Apr 4, 2024, at 10:23, Pankaj Koti > wrote: > > +1 binding. Sounds exciting. > > Sorry I missed the discussion earlier. I have some questions but those are > implementation related > and I think the PRs will help me understand those :) > > > Best regards,

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.0 from 2.9.0rc1

2024-04-04 Thread Rahul Vats
I am getting below traceback in migration pod when trying to downgrade. Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/local/bin/airflow", line 8, in sys.exit(main()) ^^ File "/usr/local/lib/python3.11/site-packages/airflow/__main__.py", line 58, in main

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.0 from 2.9.0rc1

2024-04-04 Thread Hussein Awala
> I am unable to downgrade from version 2.9.0rc1 to 2.8.4 after upgrading. Could you provide more information about the problem? On Thursday, April 4, 2024, Rahul Vats wrote: > -1 (non-binding) > > I am unable to downgrade from version 2.9.0rc1 to 2.8.4 after upgrading. > > Regards, > Rahul

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.0 from 2.9.0rc1

2024-04-04 Thread Rahul Vats
-1 (non-binding) I am unable to downgrade from version 2.9.0rc1 to 2.8.4 after upgrading. Regards, Rahul Vats 9953794332 On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 at 13:55, Amogh Desai wrote: > Btw, these links are wrong. Instead refer this: > > 1. For PMC: > >

Re: [VOTE] AIP-62 Getting Lineage from Hook Instrumentation

2024-04-04 Thread Pankaj Koti
+1 binding. Sounds exciting. Sorry I missed the discussion earlier. I have some questions but those are implementation related and I think the PRs will help me understand those :) Best regards, *Pankaj Koti* Senior Software Engineer (Airflow OSS Engineering team) Location: Pune, Maharashtra,

Re: [VOTE] AIP-62 Getting Lineage from Hook Instrumentation

2024-04-04 Thread Phani Kumar
+1 binding. Looking forward to this On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 5:06 AM Hussein Awala wrote: > +0.9 (binding) I like the idea of this AIP, but I have not followed the > entire implementation of AIP-53 to understand the need for the proposed > implementation and discuss it, but I look forward to

Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 2.9.0 from 2.9.0rc1

2024-04-04 Thread Amogh Desai
Btw, these links are wrong. Instead refer this: 1. For PMC: https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/dev/README_RELEASE_AIRFLOW.md#verify-the-release-candidate-by-pmc-members 2. For contributors: