Skip to content

Conversation

@kacpermuda
Copy link
Contributor

Followup to #47897, adding more general decorator that will work for any provider.

Also as @eladkal pointed, we should be raising AirflowOptionalProviderFeatureException and not returning silently, so I also adjusted that.


^ 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.rst or {issue_number}.significant.rst, in newsfragments.

@kacpermuda kacpermuda force-pushed the feat-compat-require-provider-version branch from bbef693 to 068d9bd Compare March 18, 2025 13:13
@kacpermuda
Copy link
Contributor Author

@eladkal Is that approach okay with you, since you proposed this approach? Can we merge it?

@kacpermuda
Copy link
Contributor Author

kacpermuda commented Mar 19, 2025

TODO for me after this one is merged, adjust OL's DBT integration, it should also require OL provider 2.0.0 due to use of logical_date and map_index in run_id generation.

@mobuchowski mobuchowski merged commit 4174bc7 into apache:main Mar 20, 2025
60 checks passed
@kacpermuda kacpermuda deleted the feat-compat-require-provider-version branch March 20, 2025 12:11
agupta01 pushed a commit to agupta01/airflow that referenced this pull request Mar 21, 2025
@potiuk
Copy link
Member

potiuk commented Mar 22, 2025

Just a small watchout @kacpermuda @mobuchowski - that one implies Minor version bump of common.compat and any provider that depends on that feature should get min version bumped for common.compat.

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants