Skip to content

stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed - #41659

Closed
dirrao wants to merge 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom
dirrao:stackdriver_task_handler_name_arg_removal
Closed

stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed#41659
dirrao wants to merge 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom
dirrao:stackdriver_task_handler_name_arg_removal

Conversation

@dirrao

@dirraodirrao commented Aug 22, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed

@boring-cyborgboring-cyborgBot added area:logging area:providers provider:google Google (including GCP) related issues labels Aug 22, 2024
@dirraodirrao added airflow3.0:candidate Potential candidates for Airflow 3.0 airflow3.0:breaking Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes labels Aug 22, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao requested review from shahar1 and vincbeckAugust 22, 2024 06:36
@dirraodirrao self-assigned this Aug 22, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao requested a review from uranusjrAugust 22, 2024 06:41
@uranusjr

uranusjr commented Aug 22, 2024•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

This is a provider change and shouldn’t be tied with Airflow 3.0. It should be tied to when we want to bump the provider’s major version, but that should likely not be the same time as Airflow 3.0 (bumping major in both would make user migration difficult).

@potiuk

potiuk commented Aug 22, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Yes. If we make provider breaking change, this requires adding a comment in CHANGELOG for that provider and bumping the major version in provider.yaml (see comment in provider's CHANGELOG at the top). And since this is a google provider - it should be coordinated with other breaking changes removal - this is being currently disucssed in #41637 with @moiseenkov

potiuk
potiuk previously requested changes Aug 22, 2024
View reviewed changes

@potiukpotiuk left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

requesting changes to not merge it accidentally

@moiseenkov

moiseenkov commented Aug 22, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Yes

Yes. If we make provider breaking change, this requires adding a comment in CHANGELOG for that provider and bumping the major version in provider.yaml (see comment in provider's CHANGELOG at the top). And since this is a google provider - it should be coordinated with other breaking changes removal - this is being currently disucssed in #41637 with @moiseenkov

Agree with @potiuk . Let's wait for the #41637 resolution and then adjust the depreciation warning here accordingly with a proper sunset date, so users would have time to migrate their code. And once the sunset is reached, we can remove this parameter along with other stuff.

@shahar1shahar1 removed airflow3.0:candidate Potential candidates for Airflow 3.0 airflow3.0:breaking Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes labels Sep 20, 2024
@github-actions

github-actionsBot commented Nov 5, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot added the stale Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file label Nov 5, 2024
@shahar1

shahar1 commented Nov 7, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Just recalling that #41637 was resolved.
@dirrao do you want to continue working on that?

@shahar1shahar1 removed the stale Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file label Nov 7, 2024
@dirrao

dirrao commented Nov 9, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Just recalling that #41637 was resolved.
@dirrao do you want to continue working on that?

This PR was on hold because it requires a major version release. Are we planning to proceed with the major release?

@potiuk

potiuk commented Nov 11, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@dirrao -> I think you need to synchronize with @moiseenkov@VladaZakharova@MaksYermak as the plan is to remove all deprecations (likely in Google Provider). I will remove my "request changes" but i think we need some kind of "ok now we remove all deprecations before the next release of providers" cc: @eladkal

@potiuk
potiuk dismissed their stale reviewNovember 11, 2024 14:26

We are getting close to "deprecation-removal" release of the Google provider.

@moiseenkov

moiseenkov commented Nov 12, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@dirrao -> I think you need to synchronize with @moiseenkov@VladaZakharova@MaksYermak as the plan is to remove all deprecations (likely in Google Provider). I will remove my "request changes" but i think we need some kind of "ok now we remove all deprecations before the next release of providers" cc: @eladkal

We are currently working on deprecations removal and will raise a PR soon. Once it is done, I think we will be good to proceed with this PR as well.

@moiseenkov

moiseenkov commented Nov 15, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Hi,
The deprecation removal PR is ready (#43953).
@dirrao , please rebase your PR on top of my branch (or rebase on top of the main branch after my PR is merged). And please add info about breaking changes into the Google provider's CHANGELOG.rst.

@dirrao

dirrao commented Nov 16, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

#43953

Thanks for the update. I will rebase it once it is merged.

@github-actions

github-actionsBot commented Jan 1, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot added the stale Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file label Jan 1, 2025
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@potiukpotiukpotiuk left review comments
@vincbeckvincbeckAwaiting requested review from vincbeck
@shahar1shahar1Awaiting requested review from shahar1
@uranusjruranusjrAwaiting requested review from uranusjr

Assignees

@dirraodirrao

Labels

area:loggingarea:providersprovider:googleGoogle (including GCP) related issuesstaleStale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@dirrao@uranusjr@potiuk@moiseenkov@shahar1
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Add copy buttons to all 
 blocks
(function() {
function addCopyButtons() {
document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {
if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;
codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');
var btn = document.createElement('button');
btn.textContent = 'Copy';
btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';
btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };
btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };
btn.onclick = function() {
navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {
btn.textContent = 'Copied!';
setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);
});
};
codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';
codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);
});
}
addCopyButtons();
// Re-run on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed by dirrao · Pull Request #41659 · apache/airflow · GitHub
Skip to content
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed - #41659
Closed
dirrao wants to merge 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
dirrao:stackdriver_task_handler_name_arg_removal
Closed
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed#41659
dirrao wants to merge 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
dirrao:stackdriver_task_handler_name_arg_removal
Conversation
@dirrao
@dirraodirrao
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed
@boring-cyborgboring-cyborgBot
added

area:logging

area:providers

provider:google
Google (including GCP) related issues
labels
Aug 22, 2024
@dirraodirrao
added

airflow3.0:candidate
Potential candidates for Airflow 3.0
airflow3.0:breaking
Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes
labels
Aug 22, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
requested review from
shahar1 and vincbeckAugust 22, 2024 06:36
@dirraodirrao
self-assigned this
Aug 22, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
requested a review
from uranusjrAugust 22, 2024 06:41
@uranusjr
uranusjr
commented
Aug 22, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
This is a provider change and shouldn’t be tied with Airflow 3.0. It should be tied to when we want to bump the provider’s major version, but that should likely not be the same time as Airflow 3.0 (bumping major in both would make user migration difficult).
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Yes. If we make provider breaking change, this requires adding a comment in CHANGELOG for that provider and bumping the major version in provider.yaml (see comment in provider's CHANGELOG at the top). And since this is a google provider - it should be coordinated with other breaking changes removal - this is being currently disucssed in #41637 with @moiseenkov
potiuk
potiuk
previously requested changes
Aug 22, 2024
View reviewed changes
@potiukpotiuk
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

requesting changes to not merge it accidentally
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Yes
Yes. If we make provider breaking change, this requires adding a comment in CHANGELOG for that provider and bumping the major version in provider.yaml (see comment in provider's CHANGELOG at the top). And since this is a google provider - it should be coordinated with other breaking changes removal - this is being currently disucssed in #41637 with @moiseenkov
Agree with @potiuk . Let's wait for the #41637 resolution and then adjust the depreciation warning here accordingly with a proper sunset date, so users would have time to migrate their code. And once the sunset is reached, we can remove this parameter along with other stuff.
@shahar1shahar1
removed

airflow3.0:candidate
Potential candidates for Airflow 3.0
airflow3.0:breaking
Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes
labels
Sep 20, 2024
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Nov 5, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
added
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Nov 5, 2024
@shahar1
shahar1
commented
Nov 7, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Just recalling that #41637 was resolved.
@dirrao do you want to continue working on that?
@shahar1shahar1
removed
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Nov 7, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
commented
Nov 9, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Just recalling that #41637 was resolved.
@dirrao do you want to continue working on that?
This PR was on hold because it requires a major version release. Are we planning to proceed with the major release?
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Nov 11, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@dirrao -> I think you need to synchronize with @moiseenkov@VladaZakharova@MaksYermak as the plan is to remove all deprecations (likely in Google Provider). I will remove my "request changes" but i think we need some kind of "ok now we remove all deprecations before the next release of providers" cc: @eladkal
@potiuk
potiuk
dismissed
their stale reviewNovember 11, 2024 14:26
We are getting close to "deprecation-removal" release of the Google provider.
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Nov 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@dirrao -> I think you need to synchronize with @moiseenkov@VladaZakharova@MaksYermak as the plan is to remove all deprecations (likely in Google Provider). I will remove my "request changes" but i think we need some kind of "ok now we remove all deprecations before the next release of providers" cc: @eladkal
We are currently working on deprecations removal and will raise a PR soon. Once it is done, I think we will be good to proceed with this PR as well.
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Nov 15, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Hi,

The deprecation removal PR is ready (#43953).
@dirrao , please rebase your PR on top of my branch (or rebase on top of the main branch after my PR is merged). And please add info about breaking changes into the Google provider's CHANGELOG.rst.
@dirrao
dirrao
commented
Nov 16, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
#43953
Thanks for the update. I will rebase it once it is merged.
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Jan 1, 2025

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
added
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Jan 1, 2025
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@potiukpotiukpotiuk left review comments
@vincbeckvincbeckAwaiting requested review from vincbeck
@shahar1shahar1Awaiting requested review from shahar1
@uranusjruranusjrAwaiting requested review from uranusjr

Assignees

@dirraodirrao

Labels

area:loggingarea:providersprovider:googleGoogle (including GCP) related issuesstaleStale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@dirrao@uranusjr@potiuk@moiseenkov@shahar1

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode
(function() {
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '
.markdown-body {
color-scheme: dark light;
}
.markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }
.markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }
.markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }
.markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }
.markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }
.markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }
';
document.head.appendChild(style);
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed by dirrao · Pull Request #41659 · apache/airflow · GitHub
Skip to content
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed - #41659
Closed
dirrao wants to merge 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
dirrao:stackdriver_task_handler_name_arg_removal
Closed
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed#41659
dirrao wants to merge 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
dirrao:stackdriver_task_handler_name_arg_removal
Conversation
@dirrao
@dirraodirrao
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed
@boring-cyborgboring-cyborgBot
added

area:logging

area:providers

provider:google
Google (including GCP) related issues
labels
Aug 22, 2024
@dirraodirrao
added

airflow3.0:candidate
Potential candidates for Airflow 3.0
airflow3.0:breaking
Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes
labels
Aug 22, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
requested review from
shahar1 and vincbeckAugust 22, 2024 06:36
@dirraodirrao
self-assigned this
Aug 22, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
requested a review
from uranusjrAugust 22, 2024 06:41
@uranusjr
uranusjr
commented
Aug 22, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
This is a provider change and shouldn’t be tied with Airflow 3.0. It should be tied to when we want to bump the provider’s major version, but that should likely not be the same time as Airflow 3.0 (bumping major in both would make user migration difficult).
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Yes. If we make provider breaking change, this requires adding a comment in CHANGELOG for that provider and bumping the major version in provider.yaml (see comment in provider's CHANGELOG at the top). And since this is a google provider - it should be coordinated with other breaking changes removal - this is being currently disucssed in #41637 with @moiseenkov
potiuk
potiuk
previously requested changes
Aug 22, 2024
View reviewed changes
@potiukpotiuk
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

requesting changes to not merge it accidentally
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Yes
Yes. If we make provider breaking change, this requires adding a comment in CHANGELOG for that provider and bumping the major version in provider.yaml (see comment in provider's CHANGELOG at the top). And since this is a google provider - it should be coordinated with other breaking changes removal - this is being currently disucssed in #41637 with @moiseenkov
Agree with @potiuk . Let's wait for the #41637 resolution and then adjust the depreciation warning here accordingly with a proper sunset date, so users would have time to migrate their code. And once the sunset is reached, we can remove this parameter along with other stuff.
@shahar1shahar1
removed

airflow3.0:candidate
Potential candidates for Airflow 3.0
airflow3.0:breaking
Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes
labels
Sep 20, 2024
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Nov 5, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
added
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Nov 5, 2024
@shahar1
shahar1
commented
Nov 7, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Just recalling that #41637 was resolved.
@dirrao do you want to continue working on that?
@shahar1shahar1
removed
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Nov 7, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
commented
Nov 9, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Just recalling that #41637 was resolved.
@dirrao do you want to continue working on that?
This PR was on hold because it requires a major version release. Are we planning to proceed with the major release?
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Nov 11, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@dirrao -> I think you need to synchronize with @moiseenkov@VladaZakharova@MaksYermak as the plan is to remove all deprecations (likely in Google Provider). I will remove my "request changes" but i think we need some kind of "ok now we remove all deprecations before the next release of providers" cc: @eladkal
@potiuk
potiuk
dismissed
their stale reviewNovember 11, 2024 14:26
We are getting close to "deprecation-removal" release of the Google provider.
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Nov 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@dirrao -> I think you need to synchronize with @moiseenkov@VladaZakharova@MaksYermak as the plan is to remove all deprecations (likely in Google Provider). I will remove my "request changes" but i think we need some kind of "ok now we remove all deprecations before the next release of providers" cc: @eladkal
We are currently working on deprecations removal and will raise a PR soon. Once it is done, I think we will be good to proceed with this PR as well.
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Nov 15, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Hi,

The deprecation removal PR is ready (#43953).
@dirrao , please rebase your PR on top of my branch (or rebase on top of the main branch after my PR is merged). And please add info about breaking changes into the Google provider's CHANGELOG.rst.
@dirrao
dirrao
commented
Nov 16, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
#43953
Thanks for the update. I will rebase it once it is merged.
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Jan 1, 2025

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
added
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Jan 1, 2025
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@potiukpotiukpotiuk left review comments
@vincbeckvincbeckAwaiting requested review from vincbeck
@shahar1shahar1Awaiting requested review from shahar1
@uranusjruranusjrAwaiting requested review from uranusjr

Assignees

@dirraodirrao

Labels

area:loggingarea:providersprovider:googleGoogle (including GCP) related issuesstaleStale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@dirrao@uranusjr@potiuk@moiseenkov@shahar1

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer
(function() {
var ref = document.referrer;
var terms = [];
if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {
var url = new URL(ref);
var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');
if (q) {
terms = q.split(/\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });
}
}
if (terms.length === 0) return;
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';
document.head.appendChild(style);
function highlight(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node
var text = node.textContent;
var found = false;
terms.forEach(function(term) {
var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\]\\]/g, '\\') + ')', 'gi');
if (regex.test(text)) {
found = true;
var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();
var parts = text.split(regex);
parts.forEach(function(part, i) {
if (i % 2 === 0) {
frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));
} else {
var span = document.createElement('span');
span.className = 'userscript-highlight';
span.textContent = part;
frag.appendChild(span);
}
});
node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);
}
});
} else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element
var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];
if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {
Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);
}
}
}
highlight(document.body);
// Re-highlight on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed by dirrao · Pull Request #41659 · apache/airflow · GitHub
Skip to content
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed - #41659
Closed
dirrao wants to merge 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
dirrao:stackdriver_task_handler_name_arg_removal
Closed
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed#41659
dirrao wants to merge 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
dirrao:stackdriver_task_handler_name_arg_removal
Conversation
@dirrao
@dirraodirrao
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed
@boring-cyborgboring-cyborgBot
added

area:logging

area:providers

provider:google
Google (including GCP) related issues
labels
Aug 22, 2024
@dirraodirrao
added

airflow3.0:candidate
Potential candidates for Airflow 3.0
airflow3.0:breaking
Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes
labels
Aug 22, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
requested review from
shahar1 and vincbeckAugust 22, 2024 06:36
@dirraodirrao
self-assigned this
Aug 22, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
requested a review
from uranusjrAugust 22, 2024 06:41
@uranusjr
uranusjr
commented
Aug 22, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
This is a provider change and shouldn’t be tied with Airflow 3.0. It should be tied to when we want to bump the provider’s major version, but that should likely not be the same time as Airflow 3.0 (bumping major in both would make user migration difficult).
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Yes. If we make provider breaking change, this requires adding a comment in CHANGELOG for that provider and bumping the major version in provider.yaml (see comment in provider's CHANGELOG at the top). And since this is a google provider - it should be coordinated with other breaking changes removal - this is being currently disucssed in #41637 with @moiseenkov
potiuk
potiuk
previously requested changes
Aug 22, 2024
View reviewed changes
@potiukpotiuk
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

requesting changes to not merge it accidentally
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Yes
Yes. If we make provider breaking change, this requires adding a comment in CHANGELOG for that provider and bumping the major version in provider.yaml (see comment in provider's CHANGELOG at the top). And since this is a google provider - it should be coordinated with other breaking changes removal - this is being currently disucssed in #41637 with @moiseenkov
Agree with @potiuk . Let's wait for the #41637 resolution and then adjust the depreciation warning here accordingly with a proper sunset date, so users would have time to migrate their code. And once the sunset is reached, we can remove this parameter along with other stuff.
@shahar1shahar1
removed

airflow3.0:candidate
Potential candidates for Airflow 3.0
airflow3.0:breaking
Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes
labels
Sep 20, 2024
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Nov 5, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
added
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Nov 5, 2024
@shahar1
shahar1
commented
Nov 7, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Just recalling that #41637 was resolved.
@dirrao do you want to continue working on that?
@shahar1shahar1
removed
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Nov 7, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
commented
Nov 9, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Just recalling that #41637 was resolved.
@dirrao do you want to continue working on that?
This PR was on hold because it requires a major version release. Are we planning to proceed with the major release?
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Nov 11, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@dirrao -> I think you need to synchronize with @moiseenkov@VladaZakharova@MaksYermak as the plan is to remove all deprecations (likely in Google Provider). I will remove my "request changes" but i think we need some kind of "ok now we remove all deprecations before the next release of providers" cc: @eladkal
@potiuk
potiuk
dismissed
their stale reviewNovember 11, 2024 14:26
We are getting close to "deprecation-removal" release of the Google provider.
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Nov 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@dirrao -> I think you need to synchronize with @moiseenkov@VladaZakharova@MaksYermak as the plan is to remove all deprecations (likely in Google Provider). I will remove my "request changes" but i think we need some kind of "ok now we remove all deprecations before the next release of providers" cc: @eladkal
We are currently working on deprecations removal and will raise a PR soon. Once it is done, I think we will be good to proceed with this PR as well.
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Nov 15, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Hi,

The deprecation removal PR is ready (#43953).
@dirrao , please rebase your PR on top of my branch (or rebase on top of the main branch after my PR is merged). And please add info about breaking changes into the Google provider's CHANGELOG.rst.
@dirrao
dirrao
commented
Nov 16, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
#43953
Thanks for the update. I will rebase it once it is merged.
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Jan 1, 2025

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
added
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Jan 1, 2025
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@potiukpotiukpotiuk left review comments
@vincbeckvincbeckAwaiting requested review from vincbeck
@shahar1shahar1Awaiting requested review from shahar1
@uranusjruranusjrAwaiting requested review from uranusjr

Assignees

@dirraodirrao

Labels

area:loggingarea:providersprovider:googleGoogle (including GCP) related issuesstaleStale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@dirrao@uranusjr@potiuk@moiseenkov@shahar1

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page
(function() {
var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',
'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',
'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];
function cleanUrl(url) {
try {
var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);
var changed = false;
trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {
if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {
u.searchParams.delete(p);
changed = true;
}
});
return changed ? u.toString() : url;
} catch (e) {
return url;
}
}
function cleanLinks() {
document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
cleanLinks();
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1) {
if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();
node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed by dirrao · Pull Request #41659 · apache/airflow · GitHub
Skip to content
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed - #41659
Closed
dirrao wants to merge 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
dirrao:stackdriver_task_handler_name_arg_removal
Closed
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed#41659
dirrao wants to merge 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
dirrao:stackdriver_task_handler_name_arg_removal
Conversation
@dirrao
@dirraodirrao
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed
@boring-cyborgboring-cyborgBot
added

area:logging

area:providers

provider:google
Google (including GCP) related issues
labels
Aug 22, 2024
@dirraodirrao
added

airflow3.0:candidate
Potential candidates for Airflow 3.0
airflow3.0:breaking
Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes
labels
Aug 22, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
requested review from
shahar1 and vincbeckAugust 22, 2024 06:36
@dirraodirrao
self-assigned this
Aug 22, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
requested a review
from uranusjrAugust 22, 2024 06:41
@uranusjr
uranusjr
commented
Aug 22, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
This is a provider change and shouldn’t be tied with Airflow 3.0. It should be tied to when we want to bump the provider’s major version, but that should likely not be the same time as Airflow 3.0 (bumping major in both would make user migration difficult).
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Yes. If we make provider breaking change, this requires adding a comment in CHANGELOG for that provider and bumping the major version in provider.yaml (see comment in provider's CHANGELOG at the top). And since this is a google provider - it should be coordinated with other breaking changes removal - this is being currently disucssed in #41637 with @moiseenkov
potiuk
potiuk
previously requested changes
Aug 22, 2024
View reviewed changes
@potiukpotiuk
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

requesting changes to not merge it accidentally
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Yes
Yes. If we make provider breaking change, this requires adding a comment in CHANGELOG for that provider and bumping the major version in provider.yaml (see comment in provider's CHANGELOG at the top). And since this is a google provider - it should be coordinated with other breaking changes removal - this is being currently disucssed in #41637 with @moiseenkov
Agree with @potiuk . Let's wait for the #41637 resolution and then adjust the depreciation warning here accordingly with a proper sunset date, so users would have time to migrate their code. And once the sunset is reached, we can remove this parameter along with other stuff.
@shahar1shahar1
removed

airflow3.0:candidate
Potential candidates for Airflow 3.0
airflow3.0:breaking
Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes
labels
Sep 20, 2024
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Nov 5, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
added
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Nov 5, 2024
@shahar1
shahar1
commented
Nov 7, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Just recalling that #41637 was resolved.
@dirrao do you want to continue working on that?
@shahar1shahar1
removed
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Nov 7, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
commented
Nov 9, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Just recalling that #41637 was resolved.
@dirrao do you want to continue working on that?
This PR was on hold because it requires a major version release. Are we planning to proceed with the major release?
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Nov 11, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@dirrao -> I think you need to synchronize with @moiseenkov@VladaZakharova@MaksYermak as the plan is to remove all deprecations (likely in Google Provider). I will remove my "request changes" but i think we need some kind of "ok now we remove all deprecations before the next release of providers" cc: @eladkal
@potiuk
potiuk
dismissed
their stale reviewNovember 11, 2024 14:26
We are getting close to "deprecation-removal" release of the Google provider.
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Nov 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@dirrao -> I think you need to synchronize with @moiseenkov@VladaZakharova@MaksYermak as the plan is to remove all deprecations (likely in Google Provider). I will remove my "request changes" but i think we need some kind of "ok now we remove all deprecations before the next release of providers" cc: @eladkal
We are currently working on deprecations removal and will raise a PR soon. Once it is done, I think we will be good to proceed with this PR as well.
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Nov 15, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Hi,

The deprecation removal PR is ready (#43953).
@dirrao , please rebase your PR on top of my branch (or rebase on top of the main branch after my PR is merged). And please add info about breaking changes into the Google provider's CHANGELOG.rst.
@dirrao
dirrao
commented
Nov 16, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
#43953
Thanks for the update. I will rebase it once it is merged.
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Jan 1, 2025

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
added
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Jan 1, 2025
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@potiukpotiukpotiuk left review comments
@vincbeckvincbeckAwaiting requested review from vincbeck
@shahar1shahar1Awaiting requested review from shahar1
@uranusjruranusjrAwaiting requested review from uranusjr

Assignees

@dirraodirrao

Labels

area:loggingarea:providersprovider:googleGoogle (including GCP) related issuesstaleStale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@dirrao@uranusjr@potiuk@moiseenkov@shahar1

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube
(function() {
function tryTheater() {
var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label="Theater mode"], ytd-player #player button[title="Theater mode"]');
if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {
btn.click();
}
}
// Try immediately
tryTheater();
// Try after navigation (SPA)
var lastUrl = location.href;
setInterval(function() {
if (location.href !== lastUrl) {
lastUrl = location.href;
setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);
}
}, 1000);
// Also try on player load
var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed by dirrao · Pull Request #41659 · apache/airflow · GitHub
Skip to content
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed - #41659
Closed
dirrao wants to merge 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
dirrao:stackdriver_task_handler_name_arg_removal
Closed
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed#41659
dirrao wants to merge 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
dirrao:stackdriver_task_handler_name_arg_removal
Conversation
@dirrao
@dirraodirrao
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed
@boring-cyborgboring-cyborgBot
added

area:logging

area:providers

provider:google
Google (including GCP) related issues
labels
Aug 22, 2024
@dirraodirrao
added

airflow3.0:candidate
Potential candidates for Airflow 3.0
airflow3.0:breaking
Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes
labels
Aug 22, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
requested review from
shahar1 and vincbeckAugust 22, 2024 06:36
@dirraodirrao
self-assigned this
Aug 22, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
requested a review
from uranusjrAugust 22, 2024 06:41
@uranusjr
uranusjr
commented
Aug 22, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
This is a provider change and shouldn’t be tied with Airflow 3.0. It should be tied to when we want to bump the provider’s major version, but that should likely not be the same time as Airflow 3.0 (bumping major in both would make user migration difficult).
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Yes. If we make provider breaking change, this requires adding a comment in CHANGELOG for that provider and bumping the major version in provider.yaml (see comment in provider's CHANGELOG at the top). And since this is a google provider - it should be coordinated with other breaking changes removal - this is being currently disucssed in #41637 with @moiseenkov
potiuk
potiuk
previously requested changes
Aug 22, 2024
View reviewed changes
@potiukpotiuk
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

requesting changes to not merge it accidentally
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Yes
Yes. If we make provider breaking change, this requires adding a comment in CHANGELOG for that provider and bumping the major version in provider.yaml (see comment in provider's CHANGELOG at the top). And since this is a google provider - it should be coordinated with other breaking changes removal - this is being currently disucssed in #41637 with @moiseenkov
Agree with @potiuk . Let's wait for the #41637 resolution and then adjust the depreciation warning here accordingly with a proper sunset date, so users would have time to migrate their code. And once the sunset is reached, we can remove this parameter along with other stuff.
@shahar1shahar1
removed

airflow3.0:candidate
Potential candidates for Airflow 3.0
airflow3.0:breaking
Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes
labels
Sep 20, 2024
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Nov 5, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
added
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Nov 5, 2024
@shahar1
shahar1
commented
Nov 7, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Just recalling that #41637 was resolved.
@dirrao do you want to continue working on that?
@shahar1shahar1
removed
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Nov 7, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
commented
Nov 9, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Just recalling that #41637 was resolved.
@dirrao do you want to continue working on that?
This PR was on hold because it requires a major version release. Are we planning to proceed with the major release?
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Nov 11, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@dirrao -> I think you need to synchronize with @moiseenkov@VladaZakharova@MaksYermak as the plan is to remove all deprecations (likely in Google Provider). I will remove my "request changes" but i think we need some kind of "ok now we remove all deprecations before the next release of providers" cc: @eladkal
@potiuk
potiuk
dismissed
their stale reviewNovember 11, 2024 14:26
We are getting close to "deprecation-removal" release of the Google provider.
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Nov 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@dirrao -> I think you need to synchronize with @moiseenkov@VladaZakharova@MaksYermak as the plan is to remove all deprecations (likely in Google Provider). I will remove my "request changes" but i think we need some kind of "ok now we remove all deprecations before the next release of providers" cc: @eladkal
We are currently working on deprecations removal and will raise a PR soon. Once it is done, I think we will be good to proceed with this PR as well.
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Nov 15, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Hi,

The deprecation removal PR is ready (#43953).
@dirrao , please rebase your PR on top of my branch (or rebase on top of the main branch after my PR is merged). And please add info about breaking changes into the Google provider's CHANGELOG.rst.
@dirrao
dirrao
commented
Nov 16, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
#43953
Thanks for the update. I will rebase it once it is merged.
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Jan 1, 2025

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
added
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Jan 1, 2025
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@potiukpotiukpotiuk left review comments
@vincbeckvincbeckAwaiting requested review from vincbeck
@shahar1shahar1Awaiting requested review from shahar1
@uranusjruranusjrAwaiting requested review from uranusjr

Assignees

@dirraodirrao

Labels

area:loggingarea:providersprovider:googleGoogle (including GCP) related issuesstaleStale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@dirrao@uranusjr@potiuk@moiseenkov@shahar1

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content
(function() {
function unstick() {
document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role="banner"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*="position: fixed"], [style*="position:sticky"]').forEach(function(el) {
if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {
el.style.position = 'static';
el.style.top = 'auto';
el.style.zIndex = 'auto';
}
});
}
unstick();
var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed by dirrao · Pull Request #41659 · apache/airflow · GitHub
Skip to content
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed - #41659
Closed
dirrao wants to merge 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
dirrao:stackdriver_task_handler_name_arg_removal
Closed
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed#41659
dirrao wants to merge 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
dirrao:stackdriver_task_handler_name_arg_removal
Conversation
@dirrao
@dirraodirrao
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed
@boring-cyborgboring-cyborgBot
added

area:logging

area:providers

provider:google
Google (including GCP) related issues
labels
Aug 22, 2024
@dirraodirrao
added

airflow3.0:candidate
Potential candidates for Airflow 3.0
airflow3.0:breaking
Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes
labels
Aug 22, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
requested review from
shahar1 and vincbeckAugust 22, 2024 06:36
@dirraodirrao
self-assigned this
Aug 22, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
requested a review
from uranusjrAugust 22, 2024 06:41
@uranusjr
uranusjr
commented
Aug 22, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
This is a provider change and shouldn’t be tied with Airflow 3.0. It should be tied to when we want to bump the provider’s major version, but that should likely not be the same time as Airflow 3.0 (bumping major in both would make user migration difficult).
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Yes. If we make provider breaking change, this requires adding a comment in CHANGELOG for that provider and bumping the major version in provider.yaml (see comment in provider's CHANGELOG at the top). And since this is a google provider - it should be coordinated with other breaking changes removal - this is being currently disucssed in #41637 with @moiseenkov
potiuk
potiuk
previously requested changes
Aug 22, 2024
View reviewed changes
@potiukpotiuk
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

requesting changes to not merge it accidentally
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Yes
Yes. If we make provider breaking change, this requires adding a comment in CHANGELOG for that provider and bumping the major version in provider.yaml (see comment in provider's CHANGELOG at the top). And since this is a google provider - it should be coordinated with other breaking changes removal - this is being currently disucssed in #41637 with @moiseenkov
Agree with @potiuk . Let's wait for the #41637 resolution and then adjust the depreciation warning here accordingly with a proper sunset date, so users would have time to migrate their code. And once the sunset is reached, we can remove this parameter along with other stuff.
@shahar1shahar1
removed

airflow3.0:candidate
Potential candidates for Airflow 3.0
airflow3.0:breaking
Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes
labels
Sep 20, 2024
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Nov 5, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
added
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Nov 5, 2024
@shahar1
shahar1
commented
Nov 7, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Just recalling that #41637 was resolved.
@dirrao do you want to continue working on that?
@shahar1shahar1
removed
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Nov 7, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
commented
Nov 9, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Just recalling that #41637 was resolved.
@dirrao do you want to continue working on that?
This PR was on hold because it requires a major version release. Are we planning to proceed with the major release?
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Nov 11, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@dirrao -> I think you need to synchronize with @moiseenkov@VladaZakharova@MaksYermak as the plan is to remove all deprecations (likely in Google Provider). I will remove my "request changes" but i think we need some kind of "ok now we remove all deprecations before the next release of providers" cc: @eladkal
@potiuk
potiuk
dismissed
their stale reviewNovember 11, 2024 14:26
We are getting close to "deprecation-removal" release of the Google provider.
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Nov 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@dirrao -> I think you need to synchronize with @moiseenkov@VladaZakharova@MaksYermak as the plan is to remove all deprecations (likely in Google Provider). I will remove my "request changes" but i think we need some kind of "ok now we remove all deprecations before the next release of providers" cc: @eladkal
We are currently working on deprecations removal and will raise a PR soon. Once it is done, I think we will be good to proceed with this PR as well.
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Nov 15, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Hi,

The deprecation removal PR is ready (#43953).
@dirrao , please rebase your PR on top of my branch (or rebase on top of the main branch after my PR is merged). And please add info about breaking changes into the Google provider's CHANGELOG.rst.
@dirrao
dirrao
commented
Nov 16, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
#43953
Thanks for the update. I will rebase it once it is merged.
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Jan 1, 2025

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
added
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Jan 1, 2025
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@potiukpotiukpotiuk left review comments
@vincbeckvincbeckAwaiting requested review from vincbeck
@shahar1shahar1Awaiting requested review from shahar1
@uranusjruranusjrAwaiting requested review from uranusjr

Assignees

@dirraodirrao

Labels

area:loggingarea:providersprovider:googleGoogle (including GCP) related issuesstaleStale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@dirrao@uranusjr@potiuk@moiseenkov@shahar1

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site
(function() {
var enabled = true;
function applyDarkMode() {
if (!enabled) return;
// Create style element if it doesn't exist
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (!style) {
style = document.createElement('style');
style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';
document.head.appendChild(style);
}
// Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video
style.textContent = '
/* Invert everything except media */
html {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #1a1a2e !important;
}
/* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */
img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*="background-image"] {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
}
/* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */
.no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,
[data-theme="light"], [data-theme="light"],
.ace_editor, .ace_editor *,
.CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,
.monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,
.markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,
.highlight, .highlight *,
pre code, pre code * {
filter: none !important;
}
/* Fix common UI elements */
.modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #2d2d44 !important;
border-color: #444 !important;
}
/* Scrollbars */
::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }
/* Selection */
::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
';
}
function removeDarkMode() {
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (style) style.remove();
}
// Toggle with Alt+Shift+D
document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {
if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {
e.preventDefault();
enabled = !enabled;
if (enabled) {
applyDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');
} else {
removeDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');
}
}
});
// Apply on load
applyDarkMode();
// Re-apply on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {
applyDarkMode();
}
});
observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); }
})();
})();
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed by dirrao · Pull Request #41659 · apache/airflow · GitHub
Skip to content
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed - #41659
Closed
dirrao wants to merge 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
dirrao:stackdriver_task_handler_name_arg_removal
Closed
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed#41659
dirrao wants to merge 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
dirrao:stackdriver_task_handler_name_arg_removal
Conversation
@dirrao
@dirraodirrao
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
stackdriver task_handler deprecated name arg removed
@boring-cyborgboring-cyborgBot
added

area:logging

area:providers

provider:google
Google (including GCP) related issues
labels
Aug 22, 2024
@dirraodirrao
added

airflow3.0:candidate
Potential candidates for Airflow 3.0
airflow3.0:breaking
Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes
labels
Aug 22, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
requested review from
shahar1 and vincbeckAugust 22, 2024 06:36
@dirraodirrao
self-assigned this
Aug 22, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
requested a review
from uranusjrAugust 22, 2024 06:41
@uranusjr
uranusjr
commented
Aug 22, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
This is a provider change and shouldn’t be tied with Airflow 3.0. It should be tied to when we want to bump the provider’s major version, but that should likely not be the same time as Airflow 3.0 (bumping major in both would make user migration difficult).
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Yes. If we make provider breaking change, this requires adding a comment in CHANGELOG for that provider and bumping the major version in provider.yaml (see comment in provider's CHANGELOG at the top). And since this is a google provider - it should be coordinated with other breaking changes removal - this is being currently disucssed in #41637 with @moiseenkov
potiuk
potiuk
previously requested changes
Aug 22, 2024
View reviewed changes
@potiukpotiuk
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

requesting changes to not merge it accidentally
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Aug 22, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Yes
Yes. If we make provider breaking change, this requires adding a comment in CHANGELOG for that provider and bumping the major version in provider.yaml (see comment in provider's CHANGELOG at the top). And since this is a google provider - it should be coordinated with other breaking changes removal - this is being currently disucssed in #41637 with @moiseenkov
Agree with @potiuk . Let's wait for the #41637 resolution and then adjust the depreciation warning here accordingly with a proper sunset date, so users would have time to migrate their code. And once the sunset is reached, we can remove this parameter along with other stuff.
@shahar1shahar1
removed

airflow3.0:candidate
Potential candidates for Airflow 3.0
airflow3.0:breaking
Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes
labels
Sep 20, 2024
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Nov 5, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
added
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Nov 5, 2024
@shahar1
shahar1
commented
Nov 7, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Just recalling that #41637 was resolved.
@dirrao do you want to continue working on that?
@shahar1shahar1
removed
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Nov 7, 2024
@dirrao
dirrao
commented
Nov 9, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Just recalling that #41637 was resolved.
@dirrao do you want to continue working on that?
This PR was on hold because it requires a major version release. Are we planning to proceed with the major release?
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Nov 11, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@dirrao -> I think you need to synchronize with @moiseenkov@VladaZakharova@MaksYermak as the plan is to remove all deprecations (likely in Google Provider). I will remove my "request changes" but i think we need some kind of "ok now we remove all deprecations before the next release of providers" cc: @eladkal
@potiuk
potiuk
dismissed
their stale reviewNovember 11, 2024 14:26
We are getting close to "deprecation-removal" release of the Google provider.
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Nov 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@dirrao -> I think you need to synchronize with @moiseenkov@VladaZakharova@MaksYermak as the plan is to remove all deprecations (likely in Google Provider). I will remove my "request changes" but i think we need some kind of "ok now we remove all deprecations before the next release of providers" cc: @eladkal
We are currently working on deprecations removal and will raise a PR soon. Once it is done, I think we will be good to proceed with this PR as well.
@moiseenkov
moiseenkov
commented
Nov 15, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Hi,

The deprecation removal PR is ready (#43953).
@dirrao , please rebase your PR on top of my branch (or rebase on top of the main branch after my PR is merged). And please add info about breaking changes into the Google provider's CHANGELOG.rst.
@dirrao
dirrao
commented
Nov 16, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
#43953
Thanks for the update. I will rebase it once it is merged.
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Jan 1, 2025

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
added
the 
stale
Stale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file
label
Jan 1, 2025
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@potiukpotiukpotiuk left review comments
@vincbeckvincbeckAwaiting requested review from vincbeck
@shahar1shahar1Awaiting requested review from shahar1
@uranusjruranusjrAwaiting requested review from uranusjr

Assignees

@dirraodirrao

Labels

area:loggingarea:providersprovider:googleGoogle (including GCP) related issuesstaleStale PRs per the .github/workflows/stale.yml policy file

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@dirrao@uranusjr@potiuk@moiseenkov@shahar1