Remove old provider references and replace "new" with just providers #46810
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jscheffl
reviewed
Feb 16, 2025
Contributor
jscheffl
left a comment
jscheffl
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Found one nit and some error in docs (uff).
Otherwise - looking good.
potiuk
force-pushed
the
remove-old-providers-related-code
branch
from
70d4402 to
9ca501b
Compare
Member
Author
Applied nit fixes, also hopefuly the constraint/provider generation with suffix as well |
potiuk
force-pushed
the
remove-old-providers-related-code
branch
from
9ca501b to
607ebe9
Compare
hussein-awala
approved these changes
Feb 16, 2025
potiuk
force-pushed
the
remove-old-providers-related-code
branch
2 times, most recently
from
1e63d10 to
b5ba46f
Compare
potiuk
force-pushed
the
remove-old-providers-related-code
branch
2 times, most recently
from
c1440a6 to
fdc6ecc
Compare
Member
Author
|
FYI: also cc: @eladkal -> while fixing provider doc generation in the PR (was failing when generating fab) I also re-enabled (that was commented out with a TODO for me to re-enable) linting of the generated .rst files and found out that for FAB with 1.5.2 the generated documentation is not valid (repeated links in commits.rst). Also I forward-ported FAB changes from 1.5.3 |
There was a lot of code and references to old provider ways of handling old structure of providers. Once all providers have been moved, we can now remove that old code and rename old the "new_providers" references to just "providers"
potiuk
force-pushed
the
remove-old-providers-related-code
branch
from
fdc6ecc to
e168f85
Compare
dantonbertuol
pushed a commit
to dantonbertuol/airflow
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 17, 2025
…pache#46810) There was a lot of code and references to old provider ways of handling old structure of providers. Once all providers have been moved, we can now remove that old code and rename old the "new_providers" references to just "providers"
ntr
pushed a commit
to ntr/airflow
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 20, 2025
…pache#46810) There was a lot of code and references to old provider ways of handling old structure of providers. Once all providers have been moved, we can now remove that old code and rename old the "new_providers" references to just "providers"
This was referenced Apr 6, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a lot of code and references to old provider ways of handling old structure of providers. Once all providers have been moved, we can now remove that old code and rename old the "new_providers" references to just "providers"
^ Add meaningful description above
Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information.
In case of fundamental code changes, an 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 newsfragment file, named
{pr_number}.significant.rstor{issue_number}.significant.rst, in newsfragments.