Fix task CLI map_index bounds validation - #64133

Merged
shahar1 merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom
Nandann018-ux:codex/fix-task-cli-map-index-bounds
Apr 19, 2026
Merged

Fix task CLI map_index bounds validation#64133
shahar1 merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom
Nandann018-ux:codex/fix-task-cli-map-index-bounds

Conversation

@Nandann018-ux

@Nandann018-uxNandann018-ux commented Mar 24, 2026•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This PR makes the task CLI map_index bounds check raise RuntimeError (consistent with other CLI validation errors) and updates tests to assert the full error message. It keeps dynamic mapping behavior unchanged while ensuring out‑of‑range map_index values are rejected clearly.

Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?

Yes

@potiuk

potiuk commented Mar 24, 2026•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@Nandann018-ux This PR has a few issues that need to be addressed before it can be reviewed — please see our Pull Request quality criteria.

Issues found:

  • ❌ Pre-commit / static checks: Failing: CI image checks / Static checks. Run prek run --from-ref main locally to find and fix issues. See Pre-commit / static checks docs.

What to do next:

  • The comment informs you what you need to do.
  • Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
  • There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates.
  • Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.

There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.

Note: This comment was drafted by an AI-assisted triage tool and may contain mistakes. Once you have addressed the points above, an Apache Airflow maintainer — a real person — will take the next look at your PR. We use this two-stage triage process so that our maintainers' limited time is spent where it matters most: the conversation with you.

1 similar comment
@potiuk

potiuk commented Mar 24, 2026•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@Nandann018-ux This PR has a few issues that need to be addressed before it can be reviewed — please see our Pull Request quality criteria.

Issues found:

  • ❌ Pre-commit / static checks: Failing: CI image checks / Static checks. Run prek run --from-ref main locally to find and fix issues. See Pre-commit / static checks docs.

What to do next:

  • The comment informs you what you need to do.
  • Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
  • There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates.
  • Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.

There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.

Note: This comment was drafted by an AI-assisted triage tool and may contain mistakes. Once you have addressed the points above, an Apache Airflow maintainer — a real person — will take the next look at your PR. We use this two-stage triage process so that our maintainers' limited time is spent where it matters most: the conversation with you.

@Nandann018-ux

Nandann018-ux commented Mar 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@potiuk Thanks for the heads‑up. I’ve run prek run --from-ref upstream/v3-1-test --stage pre-commit locally, fixed the ruff issue, and pushed the update. Static checks should be green now.

@Nandann018-uxNandann018-ux mentioned this pull request Mar 25, 2026
Closed
@pierrejeambrun

pierrejeambrun commented Apr 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@Nandann018-ux Why did you close the PR? I think it's can still be useful to merge this improvement and beside a couple of small comments I think we're almost there.

@Nandann018-ux

Nandann018-ux commented Apr 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@pierrejeambrun Thanks for the feedback , I’ve updated the test to assert the full error message (including task id and bounds) instead of a regex, and pushed the update. Please take another look.

pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun reviewed Apr 10, 2026
View reviewed changes

@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun left a comment •
edited
Loading

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.

Nice thanks.

Just a few things:

  • Can you update the description as well as the target branch? Why is this targeting specifically v3-1-test (This is a release branch for 3.1.x which isn't used anymore). I believe this should be main since even latest airflow should benefit from it.

  • I believe there is still 1 comment unaddressed from TP. (basically convert the ValueError that you raise into a RuntimeError and adjust tests)

note: Rebase the PR, CI failure seem unrelated.

@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun removed the ready for maintainer review Set after triaging when all criteria pass. label Apr 10, 2026
@Nandann018-ux

Nandann018-ux commented Apr 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@pierrejeambrun
Thanks for the feedback — I’ve switched the out‑of‑range error to RuntimeError and updated the tests accordingly. I also rebased the branch onto main and updated the PR branch. Please take another look.

1 similar comment
@Nandann018-ux

Nandann018-ux commented Apr 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@pierrejeambrun
Thanks for the feedback — I’ve switched the out‑of‑range error to RuntimeError and updated the tests accordingly. I also rebased the branch onto main and updated the PR branch. Please take another look.

@kaxil
kaxil requested a review from CopilotApril 10, 2026 19:55
CopilotAI reviewed Apr 10, 2026
View reviewed changes

CopilotAI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 146 out of 7155 changed files in this pull request and generated 8 comments.

Comment threadairflow-core/docs/extra-packages-ref.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/operators.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/operators.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/auth-manager/index.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/conf.py
Comment thread.github/actions/post_tests_failure/action.yml
Comment threadINSTALL
Comment threadINSTALL
@pierrejeambrun

pierrejeambrun commented Apr 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Looks like a bad rebase happened, can you please fix the branch.

@Nandann018-ux

Nandann018-ux commented Apr 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@pierrejeambrun
I fixed the branch history and force-pushed it again. The PR is now rebuilt cleanly on top of the current v3-1-test branch with only the intended map_index commits. Please take another look.

pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun reviewed Apr 15, 2026
View reviewed changes

@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun left a comment •
edited
Loading

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.

Thanks.

Can you address the PR comments and mark them as resolved when you did or if they do not apply (with a comment explaining why).

Also as mentioned above this should target the main branch, not directly the release branch v3-1-test.

@Nandann018-ux

Nandann018-ux commented Apr 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@pierrejeambrun
Thanks — I’ve addressed the remaining review comments, resolved the outdated threads from the earlier bad rebase with an explanation, and retargeted the PR to main. Please take another look when you get a chance.

@shahar1

shahar1 commented Apr 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

LGTM - Rebased to trigger CI, can be merged after it's all green

@github-actions

github-actionsBot commented Apr 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Hi maintainer, this PR was merged without a milestone set.
We've automatically set the milestone to Airflow 3.2.2 based on: backport label targeting v3-2-test
If this milestone is not correct, please update it to the appropriate milestone.

This comment was generated by Milestone Tag Assistant.

@github-actions

github-actionsBot commented Apr 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Backport successfully created: v3-2-test

Note: As of Merging PRs targeted for Airflow 3.X
the committer who merges the PR is responsible for backporting the PRs that are bug fixes (generally speaking) to the maintenance branches.

In matter of doubt please ask in #release-management Slack channel.

StatusBranchResult
✅v3-2-testPR Link

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code reviewCopilot
Copilot review effort
Applies to this pull request for everyone.Learn more about Copilot code review.
Copilot left review comments
@Lee-WLee-WLee-W approved these changes
@shahar1shahar1shahar1 approved these changes
@bugraoz93bugraoz93Awaiting requested review from bugraoz93bugraoz93 is a code owner
@potiukpotiukAwaiting requested review from potiukpotiuk is a code owner
@uranusjruranusjrAwaiting requested review from uranusjr
@BasPHBasPHAwaiting requested review from BasPH
@sekiknsekiknAwaiting requested review from sekikn
@vatsrahul1001vatsrahul1001Awaiting requested review from vatsrahul1001
@romsharon98romsharon98Awaiting requested review from romsharon98
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrunAwaiting requested review from pierrejeambrun

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

area:CLI

Projects

None yet

Milestone

Airflow 3.2.2

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@Nandann018-ux@potiuk@jscheffl@pierrejeambrun@shahar1@uranusjr@Lee-W
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all 
 blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n 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;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '

Skip to content
Fix task CLI map_index bounds validation - #64133
Merged
shahar1 merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
Nandann018-ux:codex/fix-task-cli-map-index-bounds
Apr 19, 2026
Merged
Fix task CLI map_index bounds validation#64133
shahar1 merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
Nandann018-ux:codex/fix-task-cli-map-index-bounds
Conversation
@Nandann018-ux
@Nandann018-uxNandann018-ux
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This PR makes the task CLI map_index bounds check raise RuntimeError (consistent with other CLI validation errors) and updates tests to assert the full error message. It keeps dynamic mapping behavior unchanged while ensuring out‑of‑range map_index values are rejected clearly.
Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?
Yes
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux This PR has a few issues that need to be addressed before it can be reviewed — please see our Pull Request quality criteria.
Issues found:
  • ❌ Pre-commit / static checks: Failing: CI image checks / Static checks. Run prek run --from-ref main locally to find and fix issues. See Pre-commit / static checks docs.
What to do next:
  • The comment informs you what you need to do.
  • Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
  • There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates.
  • Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.
There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.
Note: This comment was drafted by an AI-assisted triage tool and may contain mistakes. Once you have addressed the points above, an Apache Airflow maintainer — a real person — will take the next look at your PR. We use this two-stage triage process so that our maintainers' limited time is spent where it matters most: the conversation with you.

1 similar comment

@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux This PR has a few issues that need to be addressed before it can be reviewed — please see our Pull Request quality criteria.
Issues found:
  • ❌ Pre-commit / static checks: Failing: CI image checks / Static checks. Run prek run --from-ref main locally to find and fix issues. See Pre-commit / static checks docs.
What to do next:
  • The comment informs you what you need to do.
  • Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
  • There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates.
  • Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.
There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.
Note: This comment was drafted by an AI-assisted triage tool and may contain mistakes. Once you have addressed the points above, an Apache Airflow maintainer — a real person — will take the next look at your PR. We use this two-stage triage process so that our maintainers' limited time is spent where it matters most: the conversation with you.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Mar 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@potiuk Thanks for the heads‑up. I’ve run prek run --from-ref upstream/v3-1-test --stage pre-commit locally, fixed the ruff issue, and pushed the update. Static checks should be green now.
@Nandann018-uxNandann018-ux
mentioned this pull request
Mar 25, 2026
 Closed

@pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
commented
Apr 7, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux Why did you close the PR? I think it's can still be useful to merge this improvement and beside a couple of small comments I think we're almost there.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 7, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun Thanks for the feedback , I’ve updated the test to assert the full error message (including task id and bounds) instead of a regex, and pushed the update. Please take another look.
pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
reviewed
Apr 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

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.

Nice thanks.
Just a few things:
  • Can you update the description as well as the target branch? Why is this targeting specifically v3-1-test (This is a release branch for 3.1.x which isn't used anymore). I believe this should be main since even latest airflow should benefit from it.
  • I believe there is still 1 comment unaddressed from TP. (basically convert the ValueError that you raise into a RuntimeError and adjust tests)
note: Rebase the PR, CI failure seem unrelated.
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
removed
the 
ready for maintainer review
Set after triaging when all criteria pass.
label
Apr 10, 2026
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks for the feedback — I’ve switched the out‑of‑range error to RuntimeError and updated the tests accordingly. I also rebased the branch onto main and updated the PR branch. Please take another look.

1 similar comment

@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks for the feedback — I’ve switched the out‑of‑range error to RuntimeError and updated the tests accordingly. I also rebased the branch onto main and updated the PR branch. Please take another look.
@kaxil
kaxil
requested a review
from CopilotApril 10, 2026 19:55
CopilotAI
reviewed
Apr 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
CopilotAI
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview
Copilot reviewed 146 out of 7155 changed files in this pull request and generated 8 comments.
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/extra-packages-ref.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/operators.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/operators.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/auth-manager/index.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/conf.py
Comment thread.github/actions/post_tests_failure/action.yml
Comment threadINSTALL
Comment threadINSTALL
@pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
commented
Apr 14, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Looks like a bad rebase happened, can you please fix the branch.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 14, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

I fixed the branch history and force-pushed it again. The PR is now rebuilt cleanly on top of the current v3-1-test branch with only the intended map_index commits. Please take another look.
pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
reviewed
Apr 15, 2026
View reviewed changes
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

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.

Thanks.
Can you address the PR comments and mark them as resolved when you did or if they do not apply (with a comment explaining why).
Also as mentioned above this should target the main branch, not directly the release branch v3-1-test.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 17, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks — I’ve addressed the remaining review comments, resolved the outdated threads from the earlier bad rebase with an explanation, and retargeted the PR to main. Please take another look when you get a chance.
@shahar1
shahar1
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
LGTM - Rebased to trigger CI, can be merged after it's all green
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Hi maintainer, this PR was merged without a milestone set.

We've automatically set the milestone to Airflow 3.2.2 based on: backport label targeting v3-2-test

If this milestone is not correct, please update it to the appropriate milestone.
This comment was generated by Milestone Tag Assistant.
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Backport successfully created: v3-2-test
Note: As of Merging PRs targeted for Airflow 3.X

the committer who merges the PR is responsible for backporting the PRs that are bug fixes (generally speaking) to the maintenance branches.
In matter of doubt please ask in #release-management Slack channel.
StatusBranchResult
✅v3-2-testPR Link
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code reviewCopilot
Copilot review effort
Applies to this pull request for everyone.Learn more about Copilot code review.
Copilot left review comments
@Lee-WLee-WLee-W approved these changes
@shahar1shahar1shahar1 approved these changes
@bugraoz93bugraoz93Awaiting requested review from bugraoz93bugraoz93 is a code owner
@potiukpotiukAwaiting requested review from potiukpotiuk is a code owner
@uranusjruranusjrAwaiting requested review from uranusjr
@BasPHBasPHAwaiting requested review from BasPH
@sekiknsekiknAwaiting requested review from sekikn
@vatsrahul1001vatsrahul1001Awaiting requested review from vatsrahul1001
@romsharon98romsharon98Awaiting requested review from romsharon98
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrunAwaiting requested review from pierrejeambrun

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area:CLI

Projects


None yet


Milestone

Airflow 3.2.2

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@Nandann018-ux@potiuk@jscheffl@pierrejeambrun@shahar1@uranusjr@Lee-W

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

Skip to content
Fix task CLI map_index bounds validation - #64133
Merged
shahar1 merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
Nandann018-ux:codex/fix-task-cli-map-index-bounds
Apr 19, 2026
Merged
Fix task CLI map_index bounds validation#64133
shahar1 merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
Nandann018-ux:codex/fix-task-cli-map-index-bounds
Conversation
@Nandann018-ux
@Nandann018-uxNandann018-ux
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This PR makes the task CLI map_index bounds check raise RuntimeError (consistent with other CLI validation errors) and updates tests to assert the full error message. It keeps dynamic mapping behavior unchanged while ensuring out‑of‑range map_index values are rejected clearly.
Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?
Yes
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux This PR has a few issues that need to be addressed before it can be reviewed — please see our Pull Request quality criteria.
Issues found:
  • ❌ Pre-commit / static checks: Failing: CI image checks / Static checks. Run prek run --from-ref main locally to find and fix issues. See Pre-commit / static checks docs.
What to do next:
  • The comment informs you what you need to do.
  • Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
  • There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates.
  • Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.
There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.
Note: This comment was drafted by an AI-assisted triage tool and may contain mistakes. Once you have addressed the points above, an Apache Airflow maintainer — a real person — will take the next look at your PR. We use this two-stage triage process so that our maintainers' limited time is spent where it matters most: the conversation with you.

1 similar comment

@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux This PR has a few issues that need to be addressed before it can be reviewed — please see our Pull Request quality criteria.
Issues found:
  • ❌ Pre-commit / static checks: Failing: CI image checks / Static checks. Run prek run --from-ref main locally to find and fix issues. See Pre-commit / static checks docs.
What to do next:
  • The comment informs you what you need to do.
  • Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
  • There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates.
  • Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.
There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.
Note: This comment was drafted by an AI-assisted triage tool and may contain mistakes. Once you have addressed the points above, an Apache Airflow maintainer — a real person — will take the next look at your PR. We use this two-stage triage process so that our maintainers' limited time is spent where it matters most: the conversation with you.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Mar 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@potiuk Thanks for the heads‑up. I’ve run prek run --from-ref upstream/v3-1-test --stage pre-commit locally, fixed the ruff issue, and pushed the update. Static checks should be green now.
@Nandann018-uxNandann018-ux
mentioned this pull request
Mar 25, 2026
 Closed

@pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
commented
Apr 7, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux Why did you close the PR? I think it's can still be useful to merge this improvement and beside a couple of small comments I think we're almost there.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 7, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun Thanks for the feedback , I’ve updated the test to assert the full error message (including task id and bounds) instead of a regex, and pushed the update. Please take another look.
pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
reviewed
Apr 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

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.

Nice thanks.
Just a few things:
  • Can you update the description as well as the target branch? Why is this targeting specifically v3-1-test (This is a release branch for 3.1.x which isn't used anymore). I believe this should be main since even latest airflow should benefit from it.
  • I believe there is still 1 comment unaddressed from TP. (basically convert the ValueError that you raise into a RuntimeError and adjust tests)
note: Rebase the PR, CI failure seem unrelated.
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
removed
the 
ready for maintainer review
Set after triaging when all criteria pass.
label
Apr 10, 2026
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks for the feedback — I’ve switched the out‑of‑range error to RuntimeError and updated the tests accordingly. I also rebased the branch onto main and updated the PR branch. Please take another look.

1 similar comment

@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks for the feedback — I’ve switched the out‑of‑range error to RuntimeError and updated the tests accordingly. I also rebased the branch onto main and updated the PR branch. Please take another look.
@kaxil
kaxil
requested a review
from CopilotApril 10, 2026 19:55
CopilotAI
reviewed
Apr 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
CopilotAI
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview
Copilot reviewed 146 out of 7155 changed files in this pull request and generated 8 comments.
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/extra-packages-ref.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/operators.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/operators.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/auth-manager/index.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/conf.py
Comment thread.github/actions/post_tests_failure/action.yml
Comment threadINSTALL
Comment threadINSTALL
@pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
commented
Apr 14, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Looks like a bad rebase happened, can you please fix the branch.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 14, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

I fixed the branch history and force-pushed it again. The PR is now rebuilt cleanly on top of the current v3-1-test branch with only the intended map_index commits. Please take another look.
pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
reviewed
Apr 15, 2026
View reviewed changes
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

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.

Thanks.
Can you address the PR comments and mark them as resolved when you did or if they do not apply (with a comment explaining why).
Also as mentioned above this should target the main branch, not directly the release branch v3-1-test.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 17, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks — I’ve addressed the remaining review comments, resolved the outdated threads from the earlier bad rebase with an explanation, and retargeted the PR to main. Please take another look when you get a chance.
@shahar1
shahar1
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
LGTM - Rebased to trigger CI, can be merged after it's all green
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Hi maintainer, this PR was merged without a milestone set.

We've automatically set the milestone to Airflow 3.2.2 based on: backport label targeting v3-2-test

If this milestone is not correct, please update it to the appropriate milestone.
This comment was generated by Milestone Tag Assistant.
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Backport successfully created: v3-2-test
Note: As of Merging PRs targeted for Airflow 3.X

the committer who merges the PR is responsible for backporting the PRs that are bug fixes (generally speaking) to the maintenance branches.
In matter of doubt please ask in #release-management Slack channel.
StatusBranchResult
✅v3-2-testPR Link
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code reviewCopilot
Copilot review effort
Applies to this pull request for everyone.Learn more about Copilot code review.
Copilot left review comments
@Lee-WLee-WLee-W approved these changes
@shahar1shahar1shahar1 approved these changes
@bugraoz93bugraoz93Awaiting requested review from bugraoz93bugraoz93 is a code owner
@potiukpotiukAwaiting requested review from potiukpotiuk is a code owner
@uranusjruranusjrAwaiting requested review from uranusjr
@BasPHBasPHAwaiting requested review from BasPH
@sekiknsekiknAwaiting requested review from sekikn
@vatsrahul1001vatsrahul1001Awaiting requested review from vatsrahul1001
@romsharon98romsharon98Awaiting requested review from romsharon98
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrunAwaiting requested review from pierrejeambrun

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area:CLI

Projects


None yet


Milestone

Airflow 3.2.2

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@Nandann018-ux@potiuk@jscheffl@pierrejeambrun@shahar1@uranusjr@Lee-W

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

Skip to content
Fix task CLI map_index bounds validation - #64133
Merged
shahar1 merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
Nandann018-ux:codex/fix-task-cli-map-index-bounds
Apr 19, 2026
Merged
Fix task CLI map_index bounds validation#64133
shahar1 merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
Nandann018-ux:codex/fix-task-cli-map-index-bounds
Conversation
@Nandann018-ux
@Nandann018-uxNandann018-ux
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This PR makes the task CLI map_index bounds check raise RuntimeError (consistent with other CLI validation errors) and updates tests to assert the full error message. It keeps dynamic mapping behavior unchanged while ensuring out‑of‑range map_index values are rejected clearly.
Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?
Yes
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux This PR has a few issues that need to be addressed before it can be reviewed — please see our Pull Request quality criteria.
Issues found:
  • ❌ Pre-commit / static checks: Failing: CI image checks / Static checks. Run prek run --from-ref main locally to find and fix issues. See Pre-commit / static checks docs.
What to do next:
  • The comment informs you what you need to do.
  • Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
  • There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates.
  • Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.
There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.
Note: This comment was drafted by an AI-assisted triage tool and may contain mistakes. Once you have addressed the points above, an Apache Airflow maintainer — a real person — will take the next look at your PR. We use this two-stage triage process so that our maintainers' limited time is spent where it matters most: the conversation with you.

1 similar comment

@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux This PR has a few issues that need to be addressed before it can be reviewed — please see our Pull Request quality criteria.
Issues found:
  • ❌ Pre-commit / static checks: Failing: CI image checks / Static checks. Run prek run --from-ref main locally to find and fix issues. See Pre-commit / static checks docs.
What to do next:
  • The comment informs you what you need to do.
  • Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
  • There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates.
  • Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.
There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.
Note: This comment was drafted by an AI-assisted triage tool and may contain mistakes. Once you have addressed the points above, an Apache Airflow maintainer — a real person — will take the next look at your PR. We use this two-stage triage process so that our maintainers' limited time is spent where it matters most: the conversation with you.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Mar 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@potiuk Thanks for the heads‑up. I’ve run prek run --from-ref upstream/v3-1-test --stage pre-commit locally, fixed the ruff issue, and pushed the update. Static checks should be green now.
@Nandann018-uxNandann018-ux
mentioned this pull request
Mar 25, 2026
 Closed

@pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
commented
Apr 7, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux Why did you close the PR? I think it's can still be useful to merge this improvement and beside a couple of small comments I think we're almost there.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 7, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun Thanks for the feedback , I’ve updated the test to assert the full error message (including task id and bounds) instead of a regex, and pushed the update. Please take another look.
pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
reviewed
Apr 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

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.

Nice thanks.
Just a few things:
  • Can you update the description as well as the target branch? Why is this targeting specifically v3-1-test (This is a release branch for 3.1.x which isn't used anymore). I believe this should be main since even latest airflow should benefit from it.
  • I believe there is still 1 comment unaddressed from TP. (basically convert the ValueError that you raise into a RuntimeError and adjust tests)
note: Rebase the PR, CI failure seem unrelated.
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
removed
the 
ready for maintainer review
Set after triaging when all criteria pass.
label
Apr 10, 2026
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks for the feedback — I’ve switched the out‑of‑range error to RuntimeError and updated the tests accordingly. I also rebased the branch onto main and updated the PR branch. Please take another look.

1 similar comment

@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks for the feedback — I’ve switched the out‑of‑range error to RuntimeError and updated the tests accordingly. I also rebased the branch onto main and updated the PR branch. Please take another look.
@kaxil
kaxil
requested a review
from CopilotApril 10, 2026 19:55
CopilotAI
reviewed
Apr 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
CopilotAI
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview
Copilot reviewed 146 out of 7155 changed files in this pull request and generated 8 comments.
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/extra-packages-ref.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/operators.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/operators.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/auth-manager/index.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/conf.py
Comment thread.github/actions/post_tests_failure/action.yml
Comment threadINSTALL
Comment threadINSTALL
@pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
commented
Apr 14, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Looks like a bad rebase happened, can you please fix the branch.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 14, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

I fixed the branch history and force-pushed it again. The PR is now rebuilt cleanly on top of the current v3-1-test branch with only the intended map_index commits. Please take another look.
pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
reviewed
Apr 15, 2026
View reviewed changes
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

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.

Thanks.
Can you address the PR comments and mark them as resolved when you did or if they do not apply (with a comment explaining why).
Also as mentioned above this should target the main branch, not directly the release branch v3-1-test.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 17, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks — I’ve addressed the remaining review comments, resolved the outdated threads from the earlier bad rebase with an explanation, and retargeted the PR to main. Please take another look when you get a chance.
@shahar1
shahar1
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
LGTM - Rebased to trigger CI, can be merged after it's all green
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Hi maintainer, this PR was merged without a milestone set.

We've automatically set the milestone to Airflow 3.2.2 based on: backport label targeting v3-2-test

If this milestone is not correct, please update it to the appropriate milestone.
This comment was generated by Milestone Tag Assistant.
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Backport successfully created: v3-2-test
Note: As of Merging PRs targeted for Airflow 3.X

the committer who merges the PR is responsible for backporting the PRs that are bug fixes (generally speaking) to the maintenance branches.
In matter of doubt please ask in #release-management Slack channel.
StatusBranchResult
✅v3-2-testPR Link
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code reviewCopilot
Copilot review effort
Applies to this pull request for everyone.Learn more about Copilot code review.
Copilot left review comments
@Lee-WLee-WLee-W approved these changes
@shahar1shahar1shahar1 approved these changes
@bugraoz93bugraoz93Awaiting requested review from bugraoz93bugraoz93 is a code owner
@potiukpotiukAwaiting requested review from potiukpotiuk is a code owner
@uranusjruranusjrAwaiting requested review from uranusjr
@BasPHBasPHAwaiting requested review from BasPH
@sekiknsekiknAwaiting requested review from sekikn
@vatsrahul1001vatsrahul1001Awaiting requested review from vatsrahul1001
@romsharon98romsharon98Awaiting requested review from romsharon98
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrunAwaiting requested review from pierrejeambrun

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area:CLI

Projects


None yet


Milestone

Airflow 3.2.2

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@Nandann018-ux@potiuk@jscheffl@pierrejeambrun@shahar1@uranusjr@Lee-W

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '

Skip to content
Fix task CLI map_index bounds validation - #64133
Merged
shahar1 merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
Nandann018-ux:codex/fix-task-cli-map-index-bounds
Apr 19, 2026
Merged
Fix task CLI map_index bounds validation#64133
shahar1 merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
Nandann018-ux:codex/fix-task-cli-map-index-bounds
Conversation
@Nandann018-ux
@Nandann018-uxNandann018-ux
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This PR makes the task CLI map_index bounds check raise RuntimeError (consistent with other CLI validation errors) and updates tests to assert the full error message. It keeps dynamic mapping behavior unchanged while ensuring out‑of‑range map_index values are rejected clearly.
Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?
Yes
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux This PR has a few issues that need to be addressed before it can be reviewed — please see our Pull Request quality criteria.
Issues found:
  • ❌ Pre-commit / static checks: Failing: CI image checks / Static checks. Run prek run --from-ref main locally to find and fix issues. See Pre-commit / static checks docs.
What to do next:
  • The comment informs you what you need to do.
  • Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
  • There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates.
  • Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.
There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.
Note: This comment was drafted by an AI-assisted triage tool and may contain mistakes. Once you have addressed the points above, an Apache Airflow maintainer — a real person — will take the next look at your PR. We use this two-stage triage process so that our maintainers' limited time is spent where it matters most: the conversation with you.

1 similar comment

@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux This PR has a few issues that need to be addressed before it can be reviewed — please see our Pull Request quality criteria.
Issues found:
  • ❌ Pre-commit / static checks: Failing: CI image checks / Static checks. Run prek run --from-ref main locally to find and fix issues. See Pre-commit / static checks docs.
What to do next:
  • The comment informs you what you need to do.
  • Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
  • There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates.
  • Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.
There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.
Note: This comment was drafted by an AI-assisted triage tool and may contain mistakes. Once you have addressed the points above, an Apache Airflow maintainer — a real person — will take the next look at your PR. We use this two-stage triage process so that our maintainers' limited time is spent where it matters most: the conversation with you.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Mar 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@potiuk Thanks for the heads‑up. I’ve run prek run --from-ref upstream/v3-1-test --stage pre-commit locally, fixed the ruff issue, and pushed the update. Static checks should be green now.
@Nandann018-uxNandann018-ux
mentioned this pull request
Mar 25, 2026
 Closed

@pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
commented
Apr 7, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux Why did you close the PR? I think it's can still be useful to merge this improvement and beside a couple of small comments I think we're almost there.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 7, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun Thanks for the feedback , I’ve updated the test to assert the full error message (including task id and bounds) instead of a regex, and pushed the update. Please take another look.
pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
reviewed
Apr 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

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.

Nice thanks.
Just a few things:
  • Can you update the description as well as the target branch? Why is this targeting specifically v3-1-test (This is a release branch for 3.1.x which isn't used anymore). I believe this should be main since even latest airflow should benefit from it.
  • I believe there is still 1 comment unaddressed from TP. (basically convert the ValueError that you raise into a RuntimeError and adjust tests)
note: Rebase the PR, CI failure seem unrelated.
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
removed
the 
ready for maintainer review
Set after triaging when all criteria pass.
label
Apr 10, 2026
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks for the feedback — I’ve switched the out‑of‑range error to RuntimeError and updated the tests accordingly. I also rebased the branch onto main and updated the PR branch. Please take another look.

1 similar comment

@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks for the feedback — I’ve switched the out‑of‑range error to RuntimeError and updated the tests accordingly. I also rebased the branch onto main and updated the PR branch. Please take another look.
@kaxil
kaxil
requested a review
from CopilotApril 10, 2026 19:55
CopilotAI
reviewed
Apr 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
CopilotAI
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview
Copilot reviewed 146 out of 7155 changed files in this pull request and generated 8 comments.
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/extra-packages-ref.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/operators.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/operators.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/auth-manager/index.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/conf.py
Comment thread.github/actions/post_tests_failure/action.yml
Comment threadINSTALL
Comment threadINSTALL
@pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
commented
Apr 14, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Looks like a bad rebase happened, can you please fix the branch.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 14, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

I fixed the branch history and force-pushed it again. The PR is now rebuilt cleanly on top of the current v3-1-test branch with only the intended map_index commits. Please take another look.
pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
reviewed
Apr 15, 2026
View reviewed changes
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

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.

Thanks.
Can you address the PR comments and mark them as resolved when you did or if they do not apply (with a comment explaining why).
Also as mentioned above this should target the main branch, not directly the release branch v3-1-test.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 17, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks — I’ve addressed the remaining review comments, resolved the outdated threads from the earlier bad rebase with an explanation, and retargeted the PR to main. Please take another look when you get a chance.
@shahar1
shahar1
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
LGTM - Rebased to trigger CI, can be merged after it's all green
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Hi maintainer, this PR was merged without a milestone set.

We've automatically set the milestone to Airflow 3.2.2 based on: backport label targeting v3-2-test

If this milestone is not correct, please update it to the appropriate milestone.
This comment was generated by Milestone Tag Assistant.
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Backport successfully created: v3-2-test
Note: As of Merging PRs targeted for Airflow 3.X

the committer who merges the PR is responsible for backporting the PRs that are bug fixes (generally speaking) to the maintenance branches.
In matter of doubt please ask in #release-management Slack channel.
StatusBranchResult
✅v3-2-testPR Link
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code reviewCopilot
Copilot review effort
Applies to this pull request for everyone.Learn more about Copilot code review.
Copilot left review comments
@Lee-WLee-WLee-W approved these changes
@shahar1shahar1shahar1 approved these changes
@bugraoz93bugraoz93Awaiting requested review from bugraoz93bugraoz93 is a code owner
@potiukpotiukAwaiting requested review from potiukpotiuk is a code owner
@uranusjruranusjrAwaiting requested review from uranusjr
@BasPHBasPHAwaiting requested review from BasPH
@sekiknsekiknAwaiting requested review from sekikn
@vatsrahul1001vatsrahul1001Awaiting requested review from vatsrahul1001
@romsharon98romsharon98Awaiting requested review from romsharon98
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrunAwaiting requested review from pierrejeambrun

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area:CLI

Projects


None yet


Milestone

Airflow 3.2.2

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@Nandann018-ux@potiuk@jscheffl@pierrejeambrun@shahar1@uranusjr@Lee-W

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

Skip to content
Fix task CLI map_index bounds validation - #64133
Merged
shahar1 merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
Nandann018-ux:codex/fix-task-cli-map-index-bounds
Apr 19, 2026
Merged
Fix task CLI map_index bounds validation#64133
shahar1 merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
Nandann018-ux:codex/fix-task-cli-map-index-bounds
Conversation
@Nandann018-ux
@Nandann018-uxNandann018-ux
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This PR makes the task CLI map_index bounds check raise RuntimeError (consistent with other CLI validation errors) and updates tests to assert the full error message. It keeps dynamic mapping behavior unchanged while ensuring out‑of‑range map_index values are rejected clearly.
Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?
Yes
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux This PR has a few issues that need to be addressed before it can be reviewed — please see our Pull Request quality criteria.
Issues found:
  • ❌ Pre-commit / static checks: Failing: CI image checks / Static checks. Run prek run --from-ref main locally to find and fix issues. See Pre-commit / static checks docs.
What to do next:
  • The comment informs you what you need to do.
  • Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
  • There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates.
  • Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.
There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.
Note: This comment was drafted by an AI-assisted triage tool and may contain mistakes. Once you have addressed the points above, an Apache Airflow maintainer — a real person — will take the next look at your PR. We use this two-stage triage process so that our maintainers' limited time is spent where it matters most: the conversation with you.

1 similar comment

@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux This PR has a few issues that need to be addressed before it can be reviewed — please see our Pull Request quality criteria.
Issues found:
  • ❌ Pre-commit / static checks: Failing: CI image checks / Static checks. Run prek run --from-ref main locally to find and fix issues. See Pre-commit / static checks docs.
What to do next:
  • The comment informs you what you need to do.
  • Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
  • There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates.
  • Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.
There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.
Note: This comment was drafted by an AI-assisted triage tool and may contain mistakes. Once you have addressed the points above, an Apache Airflow maintainer — a real person — will take the next look at your PR. We use this two-stage triage process so that our maintainers' limited time is spent where it matters most: the conversation with you.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Mar 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@potiuk Thanks for the heads‑up. I’ve run prek run --from-ref upstream/v3-1-test --stage pre-commit locally, fixed the ruff issue, and pushed the update. Static checks should be green now.
@Nandann018-uxNandann018-ux
mentioned this pull request
Mar 25, 2026
 Closed

@pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
commented
Apr 7, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux Why did you close the PR? I think it's can still be useful to merge this improvement and beside a couple of small comments I think we're almost there.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 7, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun Thanks for the feedback , I’ve updated the test to assert the full error message (including task id and bounds) instead of a regex, and pushed the update. Please take another look.
pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
reviewed
Apr 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

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.

Nice thanks.
Just a few things:
  • Can you update the description as well as the target branch? Why is this targeting specifically v3-1-test (This is a release branch for 3.1.x which isn't used anymore). I believe this should be main since even latest airflow should benefit from it.
  • I believe there is still 1 comment unaddressed from TP. (basically convert the ValueError that you raise into a RuntimeError and adjust tests)
note: Rebase the PR, CI failure seem unrelated.
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
removed
the 
ready for maintainer review
Set after triaging when all criteria pass.
label
Apr 10, 2026
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks for the feedback — I’ve switched the out‑of‑range error to RuntimeError and updated the tests accordingly. I also rebased the branch onto main and updated the PR branch. Please take another look.

1 similar comment

@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks for the feedback — I’ve switched the out‑of‑range error to RuntimeError and updated the tests accordingly. I also rebased the branch onto main and updated the PR branch. Please take another look.
@kaxil
kaxil
requested a review
from CopilotApril 10, 2026 19:55
CopilotAI
reviewed
Apr 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
CopilotAI
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview
Copilot reviewed 146 out of 7155 changed files in this pull request and generated 8 comments.
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/extra-packages-ref.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/operators.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/operators.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/auth-manager/index.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/conf.py
Comment thread.github/actions/post_tests_failure/action.yml
Comment threadINSTALL
Comment threadINSTALL
@pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
commented
Apr 14, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Looks like a bad rebase happened, can you please fix the branch.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 14, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

I fixed the branch history and force-pushed it again. The PR is now rebuilt cleanly on top of the current v3-1-test branch with only the intended map_index commits. Please take another look.
pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
reviewed
Apr 15, 2026
View reviewed changes
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

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.

Thanks.
Can you address the PR comments and mark them as resolved when you did or if they do not apply (with a comment explaining why).
Also as mentioned above this should target the main branch, not directly the release branch v3-1-test.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 17, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks — I’ve addressed the remaining review comments, resolved the outdated threads from the earlier bad rebase with an explanation, and retargeted the PR to main. Please take another look when you get a chance.
@shahar1
shahar1
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
LGTM - Rebased to trigger CI, can be merged after it's all green
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Hi maintainer, this PR was merged without a milestone set.

We've automatically set the milestone to Airflow 3.2.2 based on: backport label targeting v3-2-test

If this milestone is not correct, please update it to the appropriate milestone.
This comment was generated by Milestone Tag Assistant.
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Backport successfully created: v3-2-test
Note: As of Merging PRs targeted for Airflow 3.X

the committer who merges the PR is responsible for backporting the PRs that are bug fixes (generally speaking) to the maintenance branches.
In matter of doubt please ask in #release-management Slack channel.
StatusBranchResult
✅v3-2-testPR Link
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code reviewCopilot
Copilot review effort
Applies to this pull request for everyone.Learn more about Copilot code review.
Copilot left review comments
@Lee-WLee-WLee-W approved these changes
@shahar1shahar1shahar1 approved these changes
@bugraoz93bugraoz93Awaiting requested review from bugraoz93bugraoz93 is a code owner
@potiukpotiukAwaiting requested review from potiukpotiuk is a code owner
@uranusjruranusjrAwaiting requested review from uranusjr
@BasPHBasPHAwaiting requested review from BasPH
@sekiknsekiknAwaiting requested review from sekikn
@vatsrahul1001vatsrahul1001Awaiting requested review from vatsrahul1001
@romsharon98romsharon98Awaiting requested review from romsharon98
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrunAwaiting requested review from pierrejeambrun

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area:CLI

Projects


None yet


Milestone

Airflow 3.2.2

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@Nandann018-ux@potiuk@jscheffl@pierrejeambrun@shahar1@uranusjr@Lee-W

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

Skip to content
Fix task CLI map_index bounds validation - #64133
Merged
shahar1 merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
Nandann018-ux:codex/fix-task-cli-map-index-bounds
Apr 19, 2026
Merged
Fix task CLI map_index bounds validation#64133
shahar1 merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
Nandann018-ux:codex/fix-task-cli-map-index-bounds
Conversation
@Nandann018-ux
@Nandann018-uxNandann018-ux
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This PR makes the task CLI map_index bounds check raise RuntimeError (consistent with other CLI validation errors) and updates tests to assert the full error message. It keeps dynamic mapping behavior unchanged while ensuring out‑of‑range map_index values are rejected clearly.
Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?
Yes
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux This PR has a few issues that need to be addressed before it can be reviewed — please see our Pull Request quality criteria.
Issues found:
  • ❌ Pre-commit / static checks: Failing: CI image checks / Static checks. Run prek run --from-ref main locally to find and fix issues. See Pre-commit / static checks docs.
What to do next:
  • The comment informs you what you need to do.
  • Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
  • There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates.
  • Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.
There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.
Note: This comment was drafted by an AI-assisted triage tool and may contain mistakes. Once you have addressed the points above, an Apache Airflow maintainer — a real person — will take the next look at your PR. We use this two-stage triage process so that our maintainers' limited time is spent where it matters most: the conversation with you.

1 similar comment

@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux This PR has a few issues that need to be addressed before it can be reviewed — please see our Pull Request quality criteria.
Issues found:
  • ❌ Pre-commit / static checks: Failing: CI image checks / Static checks. Run prek run --from-ref main locally to find and fix issues. See Pre-commit / static checks docs.
What to do next:
  • The comment informs you what you need to do.
  • Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
  • There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates.
  • Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.
There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.
Note: This comment was drafted by an AI-assisted triage tool and may contain mistakes. Once you have addressed the points above, an Apache Airflow maintainer — a real person — will take the next look at your PR. We use this two-stage triage process so that our maintainers' limited time is spent where it matters most: the conversation with you.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Mar 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@potiuk Thanks for the heads‑up. I’ve run prek run --from-ref upstream/v3-1-test --stage pre-commit locally, fixed the ruff issue, and pushed the update. Static checks should be green now.
@Nandann018-uxNandann018-ux
mentioned this pull request
Mar 25, 2026
 Closed

@pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
commented
Apr 7, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux Why did you close the PR? I think it's can still be useful to merge this improvement and beside a couple of small comments I think we're almost there.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 7, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun Thanks for the feedback , I’ve updated the test to assert the full error message (including task id and bounds) instead of a regex, and pushed the update. Please take another look.
pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
reviewed
Apr 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

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.

Nice thanks.
Just a few things:
  • Can you update the description as well as the target branch? Why is this targeting specifically v3-1-test (This is a release branch for 3.1.x which isn't used anymore). I believe this should be main since even latest airflow should benefit from it.
  • I believe there is still 1 comment unaddressed from TP. (basically convert the ValueError that you raise into a RuntimeError and adjust tests)
note: Rebase the PR, CI failure seem unrelated.
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
removed
the 
ready for maintainer review
Set after triaging when all criteria pass.
label
Apr 10, 2026
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks for the feedback — I’ve switched the out‑of‑range error to RuntimeError and updated the tests accordingly. I also rebased the branch onto main and updated the PR branch. Please take another look.

1 similar comment

@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks for the feedback — I’ve switched the out‑of‑range error to RuntimeError and updated the tests accordingly. I also rebased the branch onto main and updated the PR branch. Please take another look.
@kaxil
kaxil
requested a review
from CopilotApril 10, 2026 19:55
CopilotAI
reviewed
Apr 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
CopilotAI
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview
Copilot reviewed 146 out of 7155 changed files in this pull request and generated 8 comments.
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/extra-packages-ref.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/operators.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/operators.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/auth-manager/index.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/conf.py
Comment thread.github/actions/post_tests_failure/action.yml
Comment threadINSTALL
Comment threadINSTALL
@pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
commented
Apr 14, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Looks like a bad rebase happened, can you please fix the branch.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 14, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

I fixed the branch history and force-pushed it again. The PR is now rebuilt cleanly on top of the current v3-1-test branch with only the intended map_index commits. Please take another look.
pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
reviewed
Apr 15, 2026
View reviewed changes
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

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.

Thanks.
Can you address the PR comments and mark them as resolved when you did or if they do not apply (with a comment explaining why).
Also as mentioned above this should target the main branch, not directly the release branch v3-1-test.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 17, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks — I’ve addressed the remaining review comments, resolved the outdated threads from the earlier bad rebase with an explanation, and retargeted the PR to main. Please take another look when you get a chance.
@shahar1
shahar1
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
LGTM - Rebased to trigger CI, can be merged after it's all green
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Hi maintainer, this PR was merged without a milestone set.

We've automatically set the milestone to Airflow 3.2.2 based on: backport label targeting v3-2-test

If this milestone is not correct, please update it to the appropriate milestone.
This comment was generated by Milestone Tag Assistant.
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Backport successfully created: v3-2-test
Note: As of Merging PRs targeted for Airflow 3.X

the committer who merges the PR is responsible for backporting the PRs that are bug fixes (generally speaking) to the maintenance branches.
In matter of doubt please ask in #release-management Slack channel.
StatusBranchResult
✅v3-2-testPR Link
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code reviewCopilot
Copilot review effort
Applies to this pull request for everyone.Learn more about Copilot code review.
Copilot left review comments
@Lee-WLee-WLee-W approved these changes
@shahar1shahar1shahar1 approved these changes
@bugraoz93bugraoz93Awaiting requested review from bugraoz93bugraoz93 is a code owner
@potiukpotiukAwaiting requested review from potiukpotiuk is a code owner
@uranusjruranusjrAwaiting requested review from uranusjr
@BasPHBasPHAwaiting requested review from BasPH
@sekiknsekiknAwaiting requested review from sekikn
@vatsrahul1001vatsrahul1001Awaiting requested review from vatsrahul1001
@romsharon98romsharon98Awaiting requested review from romsharon98
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrunAwaiting requested review from pierrejeambrun

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area:CLI

Projects


None yet


Milestone

Airflow 3.2.2

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@Nandann018-ux@potiuk@jscheffl@pierrejeambrun@shahar1@uranusjr@Lee-W

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

Skip to content
Fix task CLI map_index bounds validation - #64133
Merged
shahar1 merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
Nandann018-ux:codex/fix-task-cli-map-index-bounds
Apr 19, 2026
Merged
Fix task CLI map_index bounds validation#64133
shahar1 merged 2 commits into
apache:mainfrom 
Nandann018-ux:codex/fix-task-cli-map-index-bounds
Conversation
@Nandann018-ux
@Nandann018-uxNandann018-ux
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
This PR makes the task CLI map_index bounds check raise RuntimeError (consistent with other CLI validation errors) and updates tests to assert the full error message. It keeps dynamic mapping behavior unchanged while ensuring out‑of‑range map_index values are rejected clearly.
Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?
Yes
@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux This PR has a few issues that need to be addressed before it can be reviewed — please see our Pull Request quality criteria.
Issues found:
  • ❌ Pre-commit / static checks: Failing: CI image checks / Static checks. Run prek run --from-ref main locally to find and fix issues. See Pre-commit / static checks docs.
What to do next:
  • The comment informs you what you need to do.
  • Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
  • There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates.
  • Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.
There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.
Note: This comment was drafted by an AI-assisted triage tool and may contain mistakes. Once you have addressed the points above, an Apache Airflow maintainer — a real person — will take the next look at your PR. We use this two-stage triage process so that our maintainers' limited time is spent where it matters most: the conversation with you.

1 similar comment

@potiuk
potiuk
commented
Mar 24, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux This PR has a few issues that need to be addressed before it can be reviewed — please see our Pull Request quality criteria.
Issues found:
  • ❌ Pre-commit / static checks: Failing: CI image checks / Static checks. Run prek run --from-ref main locally to find and fix issues. See Pre-commit / static checks docs.
What to do next:
  • The comment informs you what you need to do.
  • Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
  • There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates.
  • Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.
There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.
Note: This comment was drafted by an AI-assisted triage tool and may contain mistakes. Once you have addressed the points above, an Apache Airflow maintainer — a real person — will take the next look at your PR. We use this two-stage triage process so that our maintainers' limited time is spent where it matters most: the conversation with you.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Mar 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@potiuk Thanks for the heads‑up. I’ve run prek run --from-ref upstream/v3-1-test --stage pre-commit locally, fixed the ruff issue, and pushed the update. Static checks should be green now.
@Nandann018-uxNandann018-ux
mentioned this pull request
Mar 25, 2026
 Closed

@pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
commented
Apr 7, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@Nandann018-ux Why did you close the PR? I think it's can still be useful to merge this improvement and beside a couple of small comments I think we're almost there.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 7, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun Thanks for the feedback , I’ve updated the test to assert the full error message (including task id and bounds) instead of a regex, and pushed the update. Please take another look.
pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
reviewed
Apr 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

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.

Nice thanks.
Just a few things:
  • Can you update the description as well as the target branch? Why is this targeting specifically v3-1-test (This is a release branch for 3.1.x which isn't used anymore). I believe this should be main since even latest airflow should benefit from it.
  • I believe there is still 1 comment unaddressed from TP. (basically convert the ValueError that you raise into a RuntimeError and adjust tests)
note: Rebase the PR, CI failure seem unrelated.
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
removed
the 
ready for maintainer review
Set after triaging when all criteria pass.
label
Apr 10, 2026
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks for the feedback — I’ve switched the out‑of‑range error to RuntimeError and updated the tests accordingly. I also rebased the branch onto main and updated the PR branch. Please take another look.

1 similar comment

@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks for the feedback — I’ve switched the out‑of‑range error to RuntimeError and updated the tests accordingly. I also rebased the branch onto main and updated the PR branch. Please take another look.
@kaxil
kaxil
requested a review
from CopilotApril 10, 2026 19:55
CopilotAI
reviewed
Apr 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
CopilotAI
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview
Copilot reviewed 146 out of 7155 changed files in this pull request and generated 8 comments.
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/extra-packages-ref.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/operators.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/operators.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/core-concepts/auth-manager/index.rst
Comment threadairflow-core/docs/conf.py
Comment thread.github/actions/post_tests_failure/action.yml
Comment threadINSTALL
Comment threadINSTALL
@pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
commented
Apr 14, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Looks like a bad rebase happened, can you please fix the branch.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 14, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

I fixed the branch history and force-pushed it again. The PR is now rebuilt cleanly on top of the current v3-1-test branch with only the intended map_index commits. Please take another look.
pierrejeambrun
pierrejeambrun
reviewed
Apr 15, 2026
View reviewed changes
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrun
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

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.

Thanks.
Can you address the PR comments and mark them as resolved when you did or if they do not apply (with a comment explaining why).
Also as mentioned above this should target the main branch, not directly the release branch v3-1-test.
@Nandann018-ux
Nandann018-ux
commented
Apr 17, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@pierrejeambrun

Thanks — I’ve addressed the remaining review comments, resolved the outdated threads from the earlier bad rebase with an explanation, and retargeted the PR to main. Please take another look when you get a chance.
@shahar1
shahar1
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
LGTM - Rebased to trigger CI, can be merged after it's all green
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Hi maintainer, this PR was merged without a milestone set.

We've automatically set the milestone to Airflow 3.2.2 based on: backport label targeting v3-2-test

If this milestone is not correct, please update it to the appropriate milestone.
This comment was generated by Milestone Tag Assistant.
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Apr 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Backport successfully created: v3-2-test
Note: As of Merging PRs targeted for Airflow 3.X

the committer who merges the PR is responsible for backporting the PRs that are bug fixes (generally speaking) to the maintenance branches.
In matter of doubt please ask in #release-management Slack channel.
StatusBranchResult
✅v3-2-testPR Link
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code reviewCopilot
Copilot review effort
Applies to this pull request for everyone.Learn more about Copilot code review.
Copilot left review comments
@Lee-WLee-WLee-W approved these changes
@shahar1shahar1shahar1 approved these changes
@bugraoz93bugraoz93Awaiting requested review from bugraoz93bugraoz93 is a code owner
@potiukpotiukAwaiting requested review from potiukpotiuk is a code owner
@uranusjruranusjrAwaiting requested review from uranusjr
@BasPHBasPHAwaiting requested review from BasPH
@sekiknsekiknAwaiting requested review from sekikn
@vatsrahul1001vatsrahul1001Awaiting requested review from vatsrahul1001
@romsharon98romsharon98Awaiting requested review from romsharon98
@pierrejeambrunpierrejeambrunAwaiting requested review from pierrejeambrun

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area:CLI

Projects


None yet


Milestone

Airflow 3.2.2

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@Nandann018-ux@potiuk@jscheffl@pierrejeambrun@shahar1@uranusjr@Lee-W