Re: [VOTE] Release Airflow 1.8.2 based on Airflow 1.8.2 RC2

[Bolke de Bruin <bd...@gmail.com>]

Yes I think so. 

Bolke

Sent from my iPhone

> On 1 Aug 2017, at 00:59, Maxime Beauchemin <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Alright so here's the INSTALL file:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2492
> 
> I'm thinking I'll cherry pick this in the 1.8-test branch and tar the whole
> repo, crank up the RC number and publish to the same location as before.
> 
> Am I on the right track?
> 
> Max
> 
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Chris Riccomini <cr...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> 
>> Oky.. then I guess we can address the feedback above. Owe you some beers,
>> Max.
>> 
>> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Bolke de Bruin <bd...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Yep
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>>> On 27 Jul 2017, at 19:00, Maxime Beauchemin <
>> maximebeauchemin@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I need to re-package it with build instructions. I'm pretty sure this
>>> means
>>>> another vote. I have time carved up to work on this today/tomorrow.
>>>> 
>>>> Max
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Chris Riccomini <
>> criccomini@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> IMO, given the level of effort for 1.8.2, and how long it's taken, we
>>>>> should not be re-voting right now unless something horrific happened
>> to
>>> the
>>>>> release.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 9:54 PM, Pavel Martynov <mr...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi, folks!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> AIRFLOW-935 issue marked as resolved and fix version is 1.8.2, but
>> this
>>>>>> commit contained in master branch only and not tagged by 1.8.2rc2.
>>>>>> Can fix of this issue be released in 1.8.2?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 2017-07-26 2:27 GMT+03:00 George Leslie-Waksman <
>>>>>> george@cloverhealth.com.invalid>:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I've checked and we are no longer relying on the previous
>>>>>>> LatestOnlyOperator behavior for any of our DAGs.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> This is not a dealbreaker (though I will need to keep it in mind).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks for asking,
>>>>>>> --George
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 2:50 PM Maxime Beauchemin <
>>>>>>> maximebeauchemin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1296] is part of 1.8.2.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Is this a dealbreaker for 1.8.2?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Max
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 2:40 PM, George Leslie-Waksman <
>>>>>>>> george@cloverhealth.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I hope that it's not too late for me to chime in but there is a
>>>>>>> breaking
>>>>>>>>> change in the behavior of LatestOnlyOperator.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The change was introduced in
>>>>>>>>> PR: https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2365
>>>>>>>>> Change: 333e0b3 [AIRFLOW-1296] Propagate SKIPPED to all downstream
>>>>>>> tasks
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Prior to this change, the LatestOnlyOperator would skip direct
>>>>>>> downstream
>>>>>>>>> but not indirect downstream; now it skips indirect downstream.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> This breaks the use of LatestOnlyOperator with TriggerRules that
>> do
>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>> propagate skips.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> --George
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:08 PM Maxime Beauchemin <
>>>>>>>>> maximebeauchemin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I think I'm gathering a good picture of what is expected here.
>>>>> I'll
>>>>>>> try
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> update the Confluence page as I go.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I'm hoping to get started tomorrow and package it early next
>>>>> week.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Max
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 6:16 PM, siddharth anand <
>>>>>> sanand@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> FYI, can anyone pictorially describe the release process (and
>>>>>> post
>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>> the apache airflow wiki)? I think that would eliminate a lot of
>>>>>>>>> confusion
>>>>>>>>>>> in the future and avoid a rehash of this email thread on the
>>>>> next
>>>>>>>>>> release.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> -s
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Hitesh Shah <
>>>>> hitesh@apache.org
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> To add, the main source tarball should have instructions to
>>>>>>>> generate
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> sdist and bdist versions. Additionally, as part of the
>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>> process
>>>>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>>>>>>> the plan is to publish to pypi (after the IPMC vote
>>>>> succeeds),
>>>>>>> then
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate bits also need to be verified/voted upon. There
>>>>> are
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>> exactly
>>>>>>>>>>>> counted as the official release bits but they do need to be
>>>>>>>> verified
>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>> part of the voting process to ensure that the bits do indeed
>>>>>> map
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> source release, license/notice files are correct, etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks
>>>>>>>>>>>> -- Hitesh
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Bolke de Bruin <
>>>>>>>> bdbruin@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Hitesh. We discussed it with John Ament on the IPMC.
>>>>>>>> Python
>>>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> notion of 3 types of distributions, “source”, “sdist”,
>>>>>> “bdist”,
>>>>>>>>>>> contrary
>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Java that knows only two (source, bdist). We used to vote
>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>> “sdist”,
>>>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>>>>> was deemed incorrect.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, Max, indeed we need to vote on a tar.gz that contains
>>>>>> build
>>>>>>>>>>>>> instructions in INSTALL to get to “sdist”. The build
>>>>>>> instructions
>>>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>>>>> also contain instruction how to run the license checks by
>>>>>>> Apache
>>>>>>>>> Rat.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Most
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the work probably goes in the build instructions and
>>>>>>> verifying
>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>>>>> work, but it should not be much.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any other clarification required?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bolke
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> with best regards, Pavel Martynov
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>>