Skip to content

Conversation

@eladkal
Copy link
Contributor

@eladkal eladkal commented Jun 28, 2022

now that providers>=2.2 there is no need for the hook-class-names any longer.
refrence to #17775


^ 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.

now that providers>=2.2 there is no need for the hook-class-names any longer.
refrence to apache#17775
@boring-cyborg boring-cyborg bot added provider:cncf-kubernetes Kubernetes (k8s) provider related issues area:providers provider:Apache provider:google Google (including GCP) related issues labels Jun 28, 2022
@potiuk
Copy link
Member

potiuk commented Jun 28, 2022

One more thing - hook-class-names should also be removed from airflow/provider.yaml.schema.json and provider_info.schema.json

@github-actions github-actions bot added the okay to merge It's ok to merge this PR as it does not require more tests label Jun 28, 2022
@github-actions
Copy link

The PR is likely OK to be merged with just subset of tests for default Python and Database versions without running the full matrix of tests, because it does not modify the core of Airflow. If the committers decide that the full tests matrix is needed, they will add the label 'full tests needed'. Then you should rebase to the latest main or amend the last commit of the PR, and push it with --force-with-lease.

@potiuk
Copy link
Member

potiuk commented Jun 28, 2022

As discussed on slack:

  • we should only remove hook-class-names from provider.yaml.schema and our provider.yamls
  • we should leave it in provider_info.schema and continue raising deprecation warnings if a 3rd-party provider uses hook-class-names

@eladkal
Copy link
Contributor Author

eladkal commented Jun 28, 2022

Update:
After talking to @potiuk

We are not looking to remove the feature but only remove the usage of the feature from Airflow providers.
Thus i'm changing provider.yaml.schema.json but not provider_info.schema.json since users may still use it should they want to create 3rd party custom providers for Airflow<2.2 - This is why I'm also not removing documentation of the feature from rst files

@eladkal
Copy link
Contributor Author

eladkal commented Jun 28, 2022

@potiuk I think we are ready here :)

@potiuk potiuk merged commit 510a6ba into apache:main Jun 28, 2022
@potiuk
Copy link
Member

potiuk commented Jun 28, 2022

I ❤️ code removal !

@potiuk
Copy link
Member

potiuk commented Jun 28, 2022

image

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

Labels

area:providers okay to merge It's ok to merge this PR as it does not require more tests provider:cncf-kubernetes Kubernetes (k8s) provider related issues provider:google Google (including GCP) related issues

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants