-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update release process for Providers #24680
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I find it hard to wrap my head around what I'm reading. What is the message you want to convey here?
I'd explain the branching model as discussed in https://lists.apache.org/thread/6ngq79df7op541gfwntspdtsvzlv1cr6, perhaps with a picture. And are there resources/channels for the reading of this document to read/ask? E.g. say I'd have a question about the release of a PR in the Google provider, what would I do?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks so much for this Jarek!
Ok. Cool. I am happy to iterate on it to make it better :). This is indeed not easy task, but the mssage I want to convey is:
I wanted to avoid going into too many details, those are mostly technicalities and we are already doing the very same process for v2* branches of airlfow - here just branching point and branch name is different. I might modify it and merge the policy first and then turn it into a "dev recipe" on how to do it (as usual - I have a habit of meticulously detailing the technical processes we follow - but that belongs to "dev" rather than README and I wanted to separate those two - and document the "technical" side of the process after we do it for the first time (because otherwise it will be a little guessing and will have many more mistakes. There is no "special" handling or questions about released providers. This does not introduce a new way of answering the questions "what is in provider of version x" comparing to today. Say - you want to get answers about what is in 7.0.0 version of Google Provider - you will find it here: https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow-providers-google/7.0.0/index.html#changelog . If we release 7.1.0, it will be https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow-providers-google/7.1.0/index.html#changelog (now defunct). The index of those is built automatically. And SemVer answer all the questions about backwards compatibility/features of each of providers, so the user can decide which version to upgrade to (if they upgrade providers separately):
No change in communication there - except that we will be announcing in some cases 2 version of "the same" provider instead of one at the same time. There are no changes at all to Airlfow's approach - we always use the "latest released" providers when releasing new version of Airlfow. |
I pushed a fixup with all those comments so far addressed (hopefully) |
@BasPH -> is that at least slightly better now ? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good, much more concrete now! I've added a few smaller comments, but the general message lgtm.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for drafting this Jarek! A big step in the right direction.
This release process updates Provider's release approach and "mixed-governance" model after the discussion and proposal https://lists.apache.org/thread/6ngq79df7op541gfwntspdtsvzlv1cr6
OK. If there are no more comments - I 'd love an approval and we can continue with preparing next provider release following it - I will ping the contributors to past versions that I know are interested in following it up. |
Anyone? I'd love to announce merging it and resolving the "lasy consensus" thread :) |
This release process updates Provider's release approach and
"mixed-governance" model after the discussion and proposal
https://lists.apache.org/thread/6ngq79df7op541gfwntspdtsvzlv1cr6
^ Add meaningful description above
Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information.
In case of fundamental code change, Airflow Improvement Proposal (AIP) is needed.
In case of a new dependency, check compliance with the ASF 3rd Party License Policy.
In case of backwards incompatible changes please leave a note in a newsfragement file, named
{pr_number}.significant.rst
, in newsfragments.