You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@airflow.apache.org by GitBox <gi...@apache.org> on 2021/02/14 09:14:11 UTC
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk opened a new pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
potiuk opened a new pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227
There are two types of constraints now:
* default constraints that contain all depenedncies of airflow,
all the provider packages released at the time of the relese
of that version, as well as all transitive dependencies. Following
those constraints, you can be sure Airflow's installation is
repeatable
* no-provider constraints - containing only the dependencies needed
for core airflow installation. This allows to install/upgrade
airflow without also forcing the provider's to be installed at
specific version of Airflow.
This allows for flexible management of Airflow and Provider
packages separately. Documentation about it has been added.
<!--
Thank you for contributing! Please make sure that your code changes
are covered with tests. And in case of new features or big changes
remember to adjust the documentation.
Feel free to ping committers for the review!
In case of existing issue, reference it using one of the following:
closes: #ISSUE
related: #ISSUE
How to write a good git commit message:
http://chris.beams.io/posts/git-commit/
-->
---
**^ Add meaningful description above**
Read the **[Pull Request Guidelines](https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.rst#pull-request-guidelines)** for more information.
In case of fundamental code change, Airflow Improvement Proposal ([AIP](https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Airflow+Improvements+Proposals)) is needed.
In case of a new dependency, check compliance with the [ASF 3rd Party License Policy](https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x).
In case of backwards incompatible changes please leave a note in [UPDATING.md](https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/master/UPDATING.md).
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-779287090
I Implemented a protection some time ago for it (we also store in github regitstry the exact python image that was used as the base for our cache and I thought I always pull it during the build process to make sure the same version is used. But maybe it is somewhat missing in this step (missing variable or smth). I will take a look at this in the evening and try to sort it out and push the right version (automatically generated) of constratints and see at the last builds to see if cache is properly used on self-hosted runners as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] github-actions[bot] commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
github-actions[bot] commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-779372280
[The Workflow run](https://github.com/apache/airflow/actions/runs/569274783) is cancelling this PR. It has some failed jobs matching ^Pylint$,^Static checks,^Build docs$,^Spell check docs$,^Backport packages$,^Provider packages,^Checks: Helm tests$,^Test OpenAPI*.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-779278303
> @potiuk We shouldn't be touching those files manually ever ideally (especially not based on an un-reviewed PR.)
They were automatically generated, not manually generated (I did some manual tweaks with 2.0.1 and 2.0.0 versions but not in the master build). I will have to see why this failed, but it's not because it was manually generated. If anything - and those constraints were consistent and 'pip checkable' - I will have to see why this particular build failed but it's pretty surprising that it did (the sphinx one was not because it was pushed without running the full suite of tests due to master previously broken).
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-778751194
I also updated the "packages and extras" reference doc to make even clearer distinction between providers and non-providers extras. The "core" extras have now a separate section, and provider extras separate one.
There are two packages that sit in both though:
* celery
* cncf.kubernetes
Those are needed for celery/kubernetes executor, but they also have their providers. I added a comment about it however and I think it is rather clear now what is the difference.
Note! The `non-providers` constraints contain dependencies from all "core" extras (including cncf.kubernetes and celery) which I think makes perfect sense.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] ashb commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
ashb commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-779275520
I have reverted that constraint-master commit to un-break master :- https://github.com/apache/airflow/commit/f5406cc8789aeea8c98d1721272a9bab7ad1b956
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk edited a comment on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk edited a comment on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-778750572
As discussed - we have now two versions of constraints and documentation on how to manage upgrades for providers and airflow separately. Also the "full" constraint files contain now the versions of providers released - for master those are the "latest" versions - from pypi, for previous versions of airflow, those will be versions of provider packages released at the time of preparation of that version, which will solve the problem we have with google backwards incompatible 2.0.0 provider that cannot be repeatably and easily installed via extras. I will update the constraints for 2.0.0 and 2.0.1 accordingly once we merge this one..
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] ashb commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
ashb commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-779282239
Oh hmm, sorry. I assumed that you did https://github.com/apache/airflow/commit/79ed11f9147483c4b2f6cc99d5a3e41e89d92968 manually.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-782845112
All green now - I'd love to merge it to get constraints covering all cases:
* installing airflow with extras/providers from pypi (constraints-PYTHON_VERSION.txt) - for users
* installling base airflow without providers, with basic extras only - ( constraints-no-providers-PYTHON_VERSION.txt) - for users
* installing airflow with 'source version" of providers (constraints-source-providers-PYTHON_VERSION.txt) - for CI builds
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-779383935
> What constraints file is the production build using? If it's still using the full file, then building the prod image will fail with this error
Yes that was the root cause of the problem - that the build file was using constraint in one of the scripts where it also installed the provider from locally prepared packages, I think this was the root cause of the problem and I have to simply fix the scripts to not do it when the constraints including providers will be used. I have to just test it in my fork. Just looking at fixing the docs build (still there) and making sure that the build process will work after pulling constraints from my own fork.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk merged pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk merged pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk edited a comment on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk edited a comment on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-778751194
I also updated the "packages and extras" reference doc to make even clearer distinction between providers and non-providers extras. The "core" extras have now a separate section, and provider extras separate one.
There are two packages that sit in both camps though:
* celery
* cncf.kubernetes
Those are needed for celery/kubernetes executor, but they also have their providers. I added a comment about it however and I think it is rather clear now what is the difference.
Note! The `non-providers` constraints contain dependencies from all "core" extras (including cncf.kubernetes and celery) which I think makes perfect sense.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk edited a comment on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk edited a comment on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-778751194
I also updated the "packages and extras" reference doc to make even clearer distinction between providers and non-providers extras. The "core" extras have now a separate section, and provider extras separate one.
There are two packages that sit in both camps though:
* celery
* cncf.kubernetes
Those are needed for celery/kubernetes executors, but they also have their providers. I added a comment about it however and I think it is rather clear now what is the difference.
Note! The `non-providers` constraints contain dependencies from all "core" extras (including cncf.kubernetes and celery) which I think makes perfect sense.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] github-actions[bot] commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
github-actions[bot] commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-778764067
[The Workflow run](https://github.com/apache/airflow/actions/runs/565768572) is cancelling this PR. It has some failed jobs matching ^Pylint$,^Static checks,^Build docs$,^Spell check docs$,^Backport packages$,^Provider packages,^Checks: Helm tests$,^Test OpenAPI*.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-779281509
And I actually run a full image build for PROD and CI yesterday with all the constraints from the scratch and it worked (I used the opportunity to refresh base python images used), so it is doubly-surprising it failed in this case. Also what is doubly surprising that the builds looks like is run "afresh" - it does not make use of the cache whatsoever it seems but it should. For some reason it does not, so this is really strange, I guess some way the environment prepared on self-hosted runner.
I will take a look in the evening what's wrong there.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] ashb edited a comment on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
ashb edited a comment on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-779282239
Oh hmm, sorry. I assumed that you did https://github.com/apache/airflow/commit/79ed11f9147483c4b2f6cc99d5a3e41e89d92968 manually.
(Manually as in generated the constraints and pushed, rather than editing the files manually.)
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-778826290
FYI @kaxil @ash - I already regenerated and tested good set of constraints following those changes (including non-providers constraints as well as adding apache-airflow-providers to the constraint files and it looks like it works well.
See the two last commits in https://github.com/apache/airflow/tree/constraints-2-0
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] github-actions[bot] commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
github-actions[bot] commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-779344117
[The Workflow run](https://github.com/apache/airflow/actions/runs/569167015) is cancelling this PR. It has some failed jobs matching ^Pylint$,^Static checks,^Build docs$,^Spell check docs$,^Backport packages$,^Provider packages,^Checks: Helm tests$,^Test OpenAPI*.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk edited a comment on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk edited a comment on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-779278303
> @potiuk We shouldn't be touching those files manually ever ideally (especially not based on an un-reviewed PR.)
They were semi-automatically generated, not manually generated (I did some manual tweaks with 2.0.1 and 2.0.0 versions but not in the master build). I will have to see why this failed, but it's not because it was manually generated. If anything - and those constraints were consistent and 'pip checkable' - I will have to see why this particular build failed but it's pretty surprising that it did (the sphinx one was not because it was pushed without running the full suite of tests due to master previously broken).
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-779290883
I pushed it rebasing on top of the `sphinx` limits fix, I hope it will get green this time and we can update the master constraints properly this time - after merging it. Please take a look @ashb @kaxil, I think it will solve a number of problems due to "master not failing" problem as it solves also some limits that are needed for "eager-update" case.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-778750572
As discussed - we have now two versions of constraints and documentation on how to manage upgrades for providers and airflow separately. Also the "full" constraint files contain now the versions of providers released - for master those are the "latest" versions - from pypi, for previous versions of airflow, those will be versions of provider packages released at the time of preparation of that version, which will solve the problem we have with google backwards incompatible 2.0.0 provider that cannot be repeatably and easily installed via extras. I will update the constraints for 2.0.0 and 2.0.1 accordingly.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] ashb edited a comment on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
ashb edited a comment on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-779273064
> FYI @kaxil @ash - I already regenerated and tested good set of constraints following those changes (including non-providers constraints as well as adding apache-airflow-providers to the constraint files and it looks like it works well.
>
> See the two last commits in https://github.com/apache/airflow/tree/constraints-2-0
That broke image builds. https://github.com/apache/airflow/runs/1904107297?check_suite_focus=true
```
ERROR: Could not satisfy constraints for 'apache-airflow-providers-amazon': installation from path or url cannot be constrained to a version
```
@potiuk We shouldn't be touching those files manually ever ideally (especially not based on an un-reviewed PR.)
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-778823417
One more thing I added - I also changed the 'providers' extra dependencies to not include the transitive dependencies - the extra will only have the 'apache-airflow-provider-EXTRA' dependency - and then the provider will provide the transitive dependency.
I think that was an overlook from my side that those dependencies were there in 2.0.0 and 2.0.1 -> this transitive way is much more 'future-proof' :).
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] github-actions[bot] commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
github-actions[bot] commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-782863832
The PR most likely needs to run full matrix of tests because it modifies parts of the core of Airflow. However, committers might decide to merge it quickly and take the risk. If they don't merge it quickly - please rebase it to the latest master at your convenience, or amend the last commit of the PR, and push it with --force-with-lease.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] ashb commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
ashb commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-779273064
> FYI @kaxil @ash - I already regenerated and tested good set of constraints following those changes (including non-providers constraints as well as adding apache-airflow-providers to the constraint files and it looks like it works well.
>
> See the two last commits in https://github.com/apache/airflow/tree/constraints-2-0
That broke image builds. https://github.com/apache/airflow/runs/1904107297?check_suite_focus=true
```
ERROR: Could not satisfy constraints for 'apache-airflow-providers-amazon': installation from path or url cannot be constrained to a version
```
@potiuk We shouldn't be touching those files manually ever ideally.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-779285398
> Oh hmm, sorry. I assumed that you did [79ed11f](https://github.com/apache/airflow/commit/79ed11f9147483c4b2f6cc99d5a3e41e89d92968) manually.
@ashb I think what *might* be the reason - the build assumes that the docker engine is unpopulated when it starts (we have the `docker system prune --all` as the prerequisite step - which was there for a good reason - one of them was that it always pulled latest versions of python images before the build. Removing the "cleanup" step might have changed the behaviour and some of the pre-populated images (notably python one) might be causing different behaviour (for example last week keys expired in old python images and they were re-populated by python team). Not sure yet if that is the case but this might be the reason why cache is not actually used during the build (It will not be used if your local python version is different than the one used to build the base image).
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] potiuk commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-780147598
Hey @ashb @kaxil - I fixed all the problem:
The build generally (except occasional mysql error) - succeeded as master build:
Image build: https://github.com/potiuk/airflow/actions/runs/572616215
CI Build: https://github.com/potiuk/airflow/actions/runs/572616144
I also hope it is going to succeed now here as well as PR:
The change to constraints in master are here : https://github.com/potiuk/airflow/commit/8721c58efc1ecf0772405c4093094cd5cae44cfb
There are three types of constraints:
* constraints - the constraints including providers from PyPI
* constraints-source-providers - the constraints generated for latest sources (needed by CI when new providers or added but not yet released or when dependencies changed for providers)
* constraints-no-providers - just "core" dependencies.
I'd love to merge this quickly and cherry-pick to 2.0 so that 2.0.2 constraints can be fully generated automatically.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [airflow] github-actions[bot] commented on pull request #14227: Implements generation of separate constraints for core and providers
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
github-actions[bot] commented on pull request #14227:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/14227#issuecomment-778830449
[The Workflow run](https://github.com/apache/airflow/actions/runs/566546622) is cancelling this PR. It has some failed jobs matching ^Pylint$,^Static checks,^Build docs$,^Spell check docs$,^Backport packages$,^Provider packages,^Checks: Helm tests$,^Test OpenAPI*.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org