Amend time-machine update in unit tests#58454
Conversation
bugraoz93
requested review from
amoghrajesh,
ashb,
gopidesupavan,
jscheffl and
potiuk
jscheffl
left a comment
jscheffl
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, you were faster than me!
One small sanity question before merge...
|
Seems providers are impacted as well will update before merge it in a moment |
bugraoz93
force-pushed
the
task-instance-time-machine-update
branch
from
b38e26e to
fc677be
Compare
|
Okay, and some in task-sdk tests :) Added those as well |
|
devel-common pays off well while managing these updates for breaking changes |
bugraoz93
changed the title
|
There are other issues with DBT Cloud and task-sdk. One is below, which seems hanging. task-sdk failures seem unrelated, but I will double-check |
|
It doesn't seem like it is related because |
|
Okay, all using time-machine but in the correct manner. This looks suspicious if the update is really working in all cases 🤔 |
|
They are not importing time-machine or seeing it from it, maybe that's the reason |
|
They introduced |
|
Maybe it is easier to version cap to a higher version if we cannot find it, because I see there are lots of tests following the new notation and they are not failing |
Yes. And create an issue to upgrade it. |
bugraoz93
force-pushed
the
task-instance-time-machine-update
branch
from
bac3f9f to
c428e28
Compare
|
Reverted the changes and added a version cap to time-machine. Created the issue as well. I need to go to bed :) |
|
We will need this restriction in v3 branch as well |
|
Manual cherry pick here: #58486 |
* add version cap to time-machine * Apply suggestion from @potiuk --------- Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>
* add version cap to time-machine * Apply suggestion from @potiuk --------- Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>
* add version cap to time-machine * Apply suggestion from @potiuk --------- Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>
4 participants
^ 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 airflow-core/newsfragments.