You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@airflow.apache.org by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org> on 2025/10/03 02:07:22 UTC
[PR] [v3-1-test] Fix failed image build in v3-1-test [airflow]
potiuk opened a new pull request, #56352:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/56352
The #56208 has broken v3-1-test because it added requirements for providers, where (at least curerntly) uv workspace in v3-1-test uses provider's depedencies from local "providers" folder. We are planning to remove providers from v3-1-test branch but this is not yet done and bumping providers only in "airflow" requireements without bumping them in pyproject.toml caused conflicts when installing airflow from local sources in CI image.
bumping the versions in pyproject.toml should solve the problem until different mechanism is implemented in v3-* branches.
<!--
Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
distributed with this work for additional information
regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
"License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
software distributed under the License is distributed on an
"AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
specific language governing permissions and limitations
under the License.
-->
<!--
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 an 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/
-->
<!-- Please keep an empty line above the dashes. -->
---
**^ Add meaningful description above**
Read the **[Pull Request Guidelines](https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/contributing-docs/05_pull_requests.rst#pull-request-guidelines)** for more information.
In case of fundamental code changes, an Airflow Improvement Proposal ([AIP](https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Airflow+Improvement+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 a newsfragment file, named `{pr_number}.significant.rst` or `{issue_number}.significant.rst`, in [airflow-core/newsfragments](https://github.com/apache/airflow/tree/main/airflow-core/newsfragments).
--
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.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] [v3-1-test] Fix failed image build in v3-1-test [airflow]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on PR #56352:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/56352#issuecomment-3363924150
The (potential) failures in this build will be visible here: https://github.com/apache/airflow/actions/runs/18210782954/job/51850747016 (and In `#internal-airflow-ci-cid` channel on Slack.
--
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.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] [v3-1-test] Fix failed image build in v3-1-test [airflow]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on PR #56352:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/56352#issuecomment-3363913997
Image is correctly built and not failing in this one - so I am merging it now -> but if there are any fixes that needs to be done to make it green - I am not likely to be able to implement it while on vacations @eladkal @kaxil.
--
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.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] [v3-1-test] Fix failed image build in v3-1-test [airflow]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk merged PR #56352:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/56352
--
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.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] [v3-1-test] Fix failed image build in v3-1-test [airflow]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on PR #56352:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/56352#issuecomment-3363906921
@eladkal @kaxil -> this should fix broken image build in v3-1-test - broken by https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/56208 - which introduced conflict in the workspace where local providers in v3-1-test were conflicting with those specified in required dependencies by airflow-core.
As explained https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/56251#issuecomment-3355071478 - this is a new thing to limit providers to higher versions than they were at the moment of branch relase. the #56251 backport failed (but was merged regardless). In the future when we remove providers entirely from v3* branches (which will require a number of breeze and workspace definition changes, so it is not yet done) this might work differently - but if we want to increase the version of provider to something higher than it was at the moment of branching things off, either the provider changes need to be baclported or the version artifficially bumped in provider.yaml (and generated pyproject.toml) - which I just did.
Since the #56251 was merged - apparently a few backports were merged without running tests (and failing) which is generallly not a good idea I think. Probably it would be better to wait with merging the #56251. Right now it's likely there will be other failures merged from those merged PRs (hopefully not). Generally speaking - it would be great idea to make sure tha the v3-1-test branch is back green - after this one is merged.
--
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.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org