Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Status of testing Providers that were prepared on April 13, 2024 #38997

Closed
4 of 12 tasks
eladkal opened this issue Apr 13, 2024 · 7 comments
Closed
4 of 12 tasks

Status of testing Providers that were prepared on April 13, 2024 #38997

eladkal opened this issue Apr 13, 2024 · 7 comments
Labels
kind:meta High-level information important to the community testing status Status of testing releases

Comments

@eladkal
Copy link
Contributor

eladkal commented Apr 13, 2024

Body

I have a kind request for all the contributors to the latest provider packages release.
Could you please help us to test the RC versions of the providers?

The guidelines on how to test providers can be found in

Verify providers by contributors

Let us know in the comment, whether the issue is addressed.

Those are providers that require testing as there were some substantial changes introduced:

Provider databricks: 6.3.0rc2

Provider yandex: 3.10.0rc2

All users involved in the PRs:
@Lee-W @SubhamSinghal @uzhastik @shahar1 @Taragolis

Committer

  • I acknowledge that I am a maintainer/committer of the Apache Airflow project.
@eladkal eladkal added kind:meta High-level information important to the community testing status Status of testing releases labels Apr 13, 2024
airflow-oss-bot added a commit to astronomer/astronomer-providers that referenced this issue Apr 14, 2024
@pankajkoti
Copy link
Member

pankajkoti commented Apr 14, 2024

For the databricks provider, for PRs #38741 and #38918 to work well, we would need PR #38962 to be included as well 😐

cc: @SubhamSinghal @Lee-W

@eladkal
Copy link
Contributor Author

eladkal commented Apr 14, 2024

For the databricks provider, for PRs #38741 and #38918 to work well, we would need PR #38962 to be included as well 😐

cc: @SubhamSinghal @Lee-W

Why? It looks like a feature not a fix to regression from rc1

@pankajkoti
Copy link
Member

Why? It looks like a feature not a fix to regression from rc1

It's that the work done in PR #38741 contained a couple of issues of which one was fixed in #38918 , however the work that has been done in #38741 will not work as expected due to another issue which is getting fixed in #38962 . Essentially, the permissions endpoint call introduced in #38741 expects a job ID which was missing in it, and PR #38962 fixes that. So it will be like if we do not include #38962 , we're releasing #38741 which we know has an issue/bug.

@eladkal
Copy link
Contributor Author

eladkal commented Apr 14, 2024

Thanks for the explnation. I will exclude databricks and prepare RC3.
Can you handle the review/merge of the needed PR?

@Lee-W
Copy link
Member

Lee-W commented Apr 14, 2024

@eladkal Just reviewed and merged #38962

@SubhamSinghal
Copy link
Contributor

Testes #38702, working as expected.

@eladkal
Copy link
Contributor Author

eladkal commented Apr 16, 2024

Thank you everyone. Providers are released.
databricks provider is excluded and will have RC3

I invite everyone to help improve providers for the next release, a list of open issues can be found here.

@eladkal eladkal closed this as completed Apr 16, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind:meta High-level information important to the community testing status Status of testing releases
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants