Fix test for PROD images to include >= conditions #38574
Merged
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
Some of the providers specified in list of packages might have a >= specification, for that case we should avoid treating all of the specification as part of the provider id and strip the part after >=.
boring-cyborg
bot
added
the
area:production-image
potiuk
changed the title
ephraimbuddy
approved these changes
Mar 28, 2024
ephraimbuddy
added
the
changelog:skip
ephraimbuddy
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 31, 2024
Some of the providers specified in list of packages might have a >= specification, for that case we should avoid treating all of the specification as part of the provider id and strip the part after >=. (cherry picked from commit d6d7264)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Some of the providers specified in list of packages might have a >= specification, for that case we should avoid treating all of the specification as part of the provider id and strip the part after >=.
^ 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.