Skip to content

Status of testing Providers that were prepared on February 21, 2025 #46973

Description

@eladkal

Body

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

The guidelines on how to test providers can be found in

Verify providers by contributors

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

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

Provider amazon: 9.4.0rc1

Provider apache.beam: 6.0.2rc1

Provider apache.hive: 9.0.2rc1

Provider apache.livy: 4.2.0rc1

Provider celery: 3.10.2rc1

Provider cncf.kubernetes: 10.3.0rc1

Provider cohere: 1.4.2rc1

Provider common.compat: 1.5.0rc1

Provider common.sql: 1.23.0rc1

Provider databricks: 7.2.0rc1

Provider dbt.cloud: 4.2.0rc1

Provider docker: 4.2.0rc1

Provider elasticsearch: 6.2.0rc1

Provider exasol: 4.7.2rc1

Provider google: 14.0.0rc1

Provider http: 5.2.0rc1

Provider microsoft.azure: 12.2.0rc1

Provider microsoft.mssql: 4.2.0rc1

Provider microsoft.winrm: 3.9.0rc1

Provider mongo: 5.0.1rc1

Provider mysql: 6.1.0rc1

Provider openlineage: 2.1.0rc1

Provider opensearch: 1.6.1rc1

Provider pagerduty: 4.0.1rc1

Provider papermill: 3.9.1rc1

Provider postgres: 6.1.0rc1

Provider presto: 5.8.1rc1

Provider redis: 4.0.1rc1

Provider salesforce: 5.10.0rc1

Provider sftp: 5.1.0rc1

Provider smtp: 2.0.0rc1

Provider snowflake: 6.1.0rc1

Provider sqlite: 4.0.0rc1

Provider ssh: 4.0.0rc1

Provider standard: 0.1.0rc1

Provider trino: 6.0.1rc1

Provider weaviate: 3.0.1rc1

All users involved in the PRs:
@lendle @darkag @o-nikolas @perry2of5 @amoghrajesh @SuccessMoses @joellabes @MaksYermak @kanagaraj-dhanapal-89 @vatsrahul1001 @plutaniano @kacpermuda @potiuk @chenkovsky @phi-friday @olegkachur-e @kunal

Committer

  • I acknowledge that I am a maintainer/committer of the Apache Airflow project.

Activity

  1. added
    kind:metaHigh-level information important to the community
    on Feb 21, 2025
  2. insomnes commented on Feb 21, 2025

    @insomnes
    Contributor

    I can see a strange artifact in Pypi docs string for various providers on this release which was not present in previous releases:

    Screenshots

    Image

    Image

    Image

  3. potiuk commented on Feb 21, 2025

    @potiuk
    Member

    I can see a strange artifact in Pypi docs string for various providers on this release which was not present in previous releases:

    Let me take a look at that -> likely some template artifact. Probably not a blocker for the release, but would be nice to fix

  4. potiuk commented on Feb 21, 2025

    @potiuk
    Member

    I can see a strange artifact in Pypi docs string for various providers on this release which was not present in previous releases:

    Likely fix here: #46975 - it will not help with the currently released packages (the "final" canidates are already prepared as well - and those are the ones we vote on in SVN - but should likely help in the future.

  5. potiuk commented on Feb 21, 2025

    @potiuk
    Member

    I updated the issue with a small hack that includes all providers

  6. raphaelauv commented on Feb 22, 2025

    @raphaelauv
    Contributor

    tested #45571 , it works 👍

  7. hardeybisey commented on Feb 22, 2025

    @hardeybisey
    Contributor

    #44960 works fine 👍

  8. simonprydden commented on Feb 22, 2025

    @simonprydden
    Contributor

    Was about to check the Asana provider change, but I can't see it in the list now.

    Image

  9. simonprydden commented on Feb 22, 2025

    @simonprydden
    Contributor

    #46553 example dag works fine. 👍

  10. nrobinson-intelycare commented on Feb 22, 2025

    @nrobinson-intelycare
    Contributor

    #45660 works!

    Image
  11. phi-friday commented on Feb 22, 2025

    @phi-friday
    Contributor

    #46643 it works fine.

  12. gopidesupavan commented on Feb 23, 2025

    @gopidesupavan
    Member

    Verified these changes are related CI #45442 #46947 #46953

  13. 7 remaining items

  14. dabla commented on Feb 24, 2025

    @dabla
    Contributor

    All following PR are working as expected:

    This PR is also working but needs an additional patch to make the field_multi_value_leniency parameter working, will open a PR for that:

  15. brouberol commented on Feb 24, 2025

    @brouberol
    Contributor

    Render a pod spec using the pod_template_file override, if passed to the executor works well in apache-airflow-providers-cncf-kubernetes==10.3.0rc1 👍

  16. jcrobak commented on Feb 24, 2025

    @jcrobak
    Contributor

    #46476 for "Provider snowflake: 6.1.0rc1" works as expected. ✅

  17. potiuk commented on Feb 24, 2025

    @potiuk
    Member

    @potiuk / @eladkal The Asana Provider is missing from the 1st message, it was in the original message.

    Feel free to test and report it regardless @simonprydden . This relase was a bit difficult (and manual) because of a bug found in the releae process, but there is nothing preventing you to test the rc - I think the only "real" change was yours #46553 and you can install the provider from https://pypi.org/project/apache-airflow-providers-asana/2.9.0rc1/

  18. simonprydden commented on Feb 24, 2025

    @simonprydden
    Contributor

    @potiuk / @eladkal The Asana Provider is missing from the 1st message, it was in the original message.

    Feel free to test and report it regardless @simonprydden . This relase was a bit difficult (and manual) because of a bug found in the releae process, but there is nothing preventing you to test the rc - I think the only "real" change was yours #46553 and you can install the provider from https://pypi.org/project/apache-airflow-providers-asana/2.9.0rc1/

    @potiuk I've tested it and works fine, just wanted to make sure it's not missed, as it's not listed on #46973 (comment) now

  19. MaksYermak commented on Feb 24, 2025

    @MaksYermak
    Contributor

    #46678 and #45023 for apache-airflow-providers-apache-beam==6.0.2rc1 work as expected

  20. potiuk commented on Feb 24, 2025

    @potiuk
    Member

    @potiuk I've tested it and works fine, just wanted to make sure it's not missed, as it's not listed on #46973 (comment) now

    Cool. No. Not forgotten - we just manually generated/updated the issue content and like it's been removed from the description accidentally.

  21. VladaZakharova commented on Feb 25, 2025

    @VladaZakharova
    Contributor

    hi!
    All my changes work as expected. Thank you!

  22. ramitkataria commented on Feb 25, 2025

    @ramitkataria
    Contributor

    Tested #46579, looks good!

  23. insomnes commented on Feb 25, 2025

    @insomnes
    Contributor
  24. lendle commented on Feb 25, 2025

    @lendle
    Contributor

    #46299 is just a documentation change. I'm not sure how to verify it -- are pre-release docs hosted somewhere? I tried building it locally following the steps here but was not successful.

  25. eladkal commented on Feb 26, 2025

    @eladkal
    ContributorAuthor

    Thank you everyone. Providers are released.

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

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

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    area:providerskind:metaHigh-level information important to the communitytesting statusStatus of testing releases

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions