+1 (non-binding)
I tested my change and ran example DAGs with cncf, databircks providers RCs,
and it worked fine.
Best,
Wei
> On Apr 16, 2024, at 8:40 PM, Elad Kalif wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> I have just cut the new wave Airflow Providers packages. This email is
> calling a vote on the
I don't think AIP is needed (because it's not really a user facing change
and generally the change is backwards compatible.
But yeah - the call for help is mostly to see / review / discuss it when we
really know the scope of the change after we have a PR that proves that yes
- it can be done.
It
Does the scope of this PR warrant an AIP?
On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 6:40 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Hello here,
>
> I have a kind request for help from maintainers (and other contributors who
> are not maintainers) - on the Connexion 3 migration for Airflow. PR here
> (unfortunately - it's one big
Hey all,
I have just cut the new wave Airflow Providers packages. This email is
calling a vote on the release,
which will last for 72 hours - which means that it will end on April 19,
2024 12:40 PM UTC and until 3 binding +1 votes have been received.
Consider this my (binding) +1.
Airflow
Hello here,
I have a kind request for help from maintainers (and other contributors who
are not maintainers) - on the Connexion 3 migration for Airflow. PR here
(unfortunately - it's one big PR and cannot be split):
https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/39055.
I would love some general comments
Dear Airflow community,
I'm happy to announce that new versions of Airflow Providers packages
prepared on April 13, 2024 were just released. Full list of PyPI packages
released is added at the end of the message.
The source release, as well as the binary releases, are available here:
Hello,
Apache Airflow Providers prepared on April 13, 2024 have been accepted.
Provider databricks is excluded from the release thus not counting votes
related to this provider.
3 "+1" binding votes received:
- Elad Kalif
- Jarek Potiuk
- Hussein Awala
Vote thread:
