You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@airflow.apache.org by Daniel Standish <da...@astronomer.io.INVALID> on 2022/02/04 01:03:08 UTC
[VOTE] deprecate days_ago helper function
Hi
I would like to call a vote on the following proposal:
Helper function `days_ago` is to be deprecated (warning of pending removal
with each call) with removal targeted for 3.0. The deprecation warning
should guide user and perhaps point to some documentation concerning how to
maintain the equivalent behavior. Until removal we should not change the
behavior of the function (apart from the warnings).
Discussion thread:
https://lists.apache.org/thread/bjtdrjztr0mrgwlkvmgpcwdssjc7mqkv
This vote will last for 7 days (until 2022-02-10 01:00 UTC), and until at
least 3 binding votes have been cast.
Thanks
Daniel
Re: [VOTE] deprecate days_ago helper function
Posted by Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>.
+1 (binding) just to be precise.
On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 1:46 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> +1. I think it's a good idea, that will gently guide our users to change
> their (bad) habits in DAG authoring, especially when accompanied with
> "equivalent behaviour" explanation.
>
> J.
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 2:03 AM Daniel Standish
> <da...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> I would like to call a vote on the following proposal:
>>
>> Helper function `days_ago` is to be deprecated (warning of pending
>> removal with each call) with removal targeted for 3.0. The deprecation
>> warning should guide user and perhaps point to some documentation
>> concerning how to maintain the equivalent behavior. Until removal we
>> should not change the behavior of the function (apart from the warnings).
>>
>> Discussion thread:
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/bjtdrjztr0mrgwlkvmgpcwdssjc7mqkv
>>
>> This vote will last for 7 days (until 2022-02-10 01:00 UTC), and until
>> at least 3 binding votes have been cast.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] deprecate days_ago helper function
Posted by Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>.
+1. I think it's a good idea, that will gently guide our users to change
their (bad) habits in DAG authoring, especially when accompanied with
"equivalent behaviour" explanation.
J.
On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 2:03 AM Daniel Standish
<da...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I would like to call a vote on the following proposal:
>
> Helper function `days_ago` is to be deprecated (warning of pending removal
> with each call) with removal targeted for 3.0. The deprecation warning
> should guide user and perhaps point to some documentation concerning how to
> maintain the equivalent behavior. Until removal we should not change the
> behavior of the function (apart from the warnings).
>
> Discussion thread:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/bjtdrjztr0mrgwlkvmgpcwdssjc7mqkv
>
> This vote will last for 7 days (until 2022-02-10 01:00 UTC), and until at
> least 3 binding votes have been cast.
>
> Thanks
>
> Daniel
>
Re: [VOTE] deprecate days_ago helper function
Posted by Daniel Standish <da...@astronomer.io.INVALID>.
The vote has passed with 6 binding +1 votes and no -1 votes.
I will proceed with a PR to implement the proposal.
Votes:
Jarek Potiuk +1 (binding)
Arthur Wiedmer +1 (binding)
Tomasz Urbaszek +1 (binding)
Daniel Standish +1 (binding)
Dennis Akpenyi +1 (non-binding)
Drew Hubl +1 (non-binding)
Josh Fell +1 (non-binding)
Jed Cunningham +1 (binding)
Collin McNulty +1 (non-binding)
Elad Kalif +1 (binding)
Thanks everyone.
Re: [VOTE] deprecate days_ago helper function
Posted by Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>.
+1 (binding)
On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 11:10 PM Collin McNulty <co...@astronomer.io.invalid>
wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 2:59 PM Jed Cunningham <je...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] deprecate days_ago helper function
Posted by Collin McNulty <co...@astronomer.io.INVALID>.
+1 (non-binding)
On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 2:59 PM Jed Cunningham <je...@apache.org>
wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
Re: [VOTE] deprecate days_ago helper function
Posted by Jed Cunningham <je...@apache.org>.
+1 (binding)
Re: [VOTE] deprecate days_ago helper function
Posted by Josh Fell <jo...@astronomer.io.INVALID>.
+1 (non-binding)
On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 3:03 PM Drew Hubl <dr...@astronomer.io.invalid>
wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Feb 4, 2022, at 11:59 AM, Dennis Akpenyi <de...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> +1 non-binding
>
> On Fri 4. Feb 2022 at 20:43, Daniel Standish <
> daniel.standish@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
>
>> I suppose I should vote also...
>>
>> +1 binding
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 11:41 AM Tomasz Urbaszek <tu...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 binding. Just please make sure we do point to resources for keeping
>>> equivalent behaviour.
>>>
>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 at 16:14, Arthur Wiedmer <ar...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 (binding)
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 3, 2022, 17:03 Daniel Standish <
>>>> daniel.standish@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi
>>>>>
>>>>> I would like to call a vote on the following proposal:
>>>>>
>>>>> Helper function `days_ago` is to be deprecated (warning of pending
>>>>> removal with each call) with removal targeted for 3.0. The deprecation
>>>>> warning should guide user and perhaps point to some documentation
>>>>> concerning how to maintain the equivalent behavior. Until removal we
>>>>> should not change the behavior of the function (apart from the warnings).
>>>>>
>>>>> Discussion thread:
>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/bjtdrjztr0mrgwlkvmgpcwdssjc7mqkv
>>>>>
>>>>> This vote will last for 7 days (until 2022-02-10 01:00 UTC), and
>>>>> until at least 3 binding votes have been cast.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> Daniel
>>>>>
>>>> --
> Dr. Dennis Akpenyi, Airflow Core Developer, Astronomer Inc.
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] deprecate days_ago helper function
Posted by Drew Hubl <dr...@astronomer.io.INVALID>.
+1 (non-binding)
> On Feb 4, 2022, at 11:59 AM, Dennis Akpenyi <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +1 non-binding
>
> On Fri 4. Feb 2022 at 20:43, Daniel Standish <da...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
> I suppose I should vote also...
>
> +1 binding
>
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 11:41 AM Tomasz Urbaszek <turbaszek@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> +1 binding. Just please make sure we do point to resources for keeping equivalent behaviour.
>
> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 at 16:14, Arthur Wiedmer <arthur@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2022, 17:03 Daniel Standish <da...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I would like to call a vote on the following proposal:
>
> Helper function `days_ago` is to be deprecated (warning of pending removal with each call) with removal targeted for 3.0. The deprecation warning should guide user and perhaps point to some documentation concerning how to maintain the equivalent behavior. Until removal we should not change the behavior of the function (apart from the warnings).
>
> Discussion thread: https://lists.apache.org/thread/bjtdrjztr0mrgwlkvmgpcwdssjc7mqkv <https://lists.apache.org/thread/bjtdrjztr0mrgwlkvmgpcwdssjc7mqkv>
>
> This vote will last for 7 days (until 2022-02-10 01:00 UTC), and until at least 3 binding votes have been cast.
>
> Thanks
>
> Daniel
> --
> Dr. Dennis Akpenyi, Airflow Core Developer, Astronomer Inc.
Re: [VOTE] deprecate days_ago helper function
Posted by Dennis Akpenyi <de...@gmail.com>.
+1 non-binding
On Fri 4. Feb 2022 at 20:43, Daniel Standish
<da...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
> I suppose I should vote also...
>
> +1 binding
>
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 11:41 AM Tomasz Urbaszek <tu...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> +1 binding. Just please make sure we do point to resources for keeping
>> equivalent behaviour.
>>
>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 at 16:14, Arthur Wiedmer <ar...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (binding)
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 3, 2022, 17:03 Daniel Standish
>>> <da...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> I would like to call a vote on the following proposal:
>>>>
>>>> Helper function `days_ago` is to be deprecated (warning of pending
>>>> removal with each call) with removal targeted for 3.0. The deprecation
>>>> warning should guide user and perhaps point to some documentation
>>>> concerning how to maintain the equivalent behavior. Until removal we
>>>> should not change the behavior of the function (apart from the warnings).
>>>>
>>>> Discussion thread:
>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/bjtdrjztr0mrgwlkvmgpcwdssjc7mqkv
>>>>
>>>> This vote will last for 7 days (until 2022-02-10 01:00 UTC), and until
>>>> at least 3 binding votes have been cast.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Daniel
>>>>
>>> --
Dr. Dennis Akpenyi, Airflow Core Developer, Astronomer Inc.
Re: [VOTE] deprecate days_ago helper function
Posted by Daniel Standish <da...@astronomer.io.INVALID>.
I suppose I should vote also...
+1 binding
On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 11:41 AM Tomasz Urbaszek <tu...@apache.org>
wrote:
> +1 binding. Just please make sure we do point to resources for keeping
> equivalent behaviour.
>
> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 at 16:14, Arthur Wiedmer <ar...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 3, 2022, 17:03 Daniel Standish
>> <da...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I would like to call a vote on the following proposal:
>>>
>>> Helper function `days_ago` is to be deprecated (warning of pending
>>> removal with each call) with removal targeted for 3.0. The deprecation
>>> warning should guide user and perhaps point to some documentation
>>> concerning how to maintain the equivalent behavior. Until removal we
>>> should not change the behavior of the function (apart from the warnings).
>>>
>>> Discussion thread:
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/bjtdrjztr0mrgwlkvmgpcwdssjc7mqkv
>>>
>>> This vote will last for 7 days (until 2022-02-10 01:00 UTC), and until
>>> at least 3 binding votes have been cast.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] deprecate days_ago helper function
Posted by Tomasz Urbaszek <tu...@apache.org>.
+1 binding. Just please make sure we do point to resources for keeping
equivalent behaviour.
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 at 16:14, Arthur Wiedmer <ar...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2022, 17:03 Daniel Standish
> <da...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> I would like to call a vote on the following proposal:
>>
>> Helper function `days_ago` is to be deprecated (warning of pending
>> removal with each call) with removal targeted for 3.0. The deprecation
>> warning should guide user and perhaps point to some documentation
>> concerning how to maintain the equivalent behavior. Until removal we
>> should not change the behavior of the function (apart from the warnings).
>>
>> Discussion thread:
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/bjtdrjztr0mrgwlkvmgpcwdssjc7mqkv
>>
>> This vote will last for 7 days (until 2022-02-10 01:00 UTC), and until
>> at least 3 binding votes have been cast.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] deprecate days_ago helper function
Posted by Arthur Wiedmer <ar...@apache.org>.
+1 (binding)
On Thu, Feb 3, 2022, 17:03 Daniel Standish
<da...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I would like to call a vote on the following proposal:
>
> Helper function `days_ago` is to be deprecated (warning of pending removal
> with each call) with removal targeted for 3.0. The deprecation warning
> should guide user and perhaps point to some documentation concerning how to
> maintain the equivalent behavior. Until removal we should not change the
> behavior of the function (apart from the warnings).
>
> Discussion thread:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/bjtdrjztr0mrgwlkvmgpcwdssjc7mqkv
>
> This vote will last for 7 days (until 2022-02-10 01:00 UTC), and until at
> least 3 binding votes have been cast.
>
> Thanks
>
> Daniel
>