Skip to content

Conversation

@fredthomsen
Copy link
Contributor

The original logic checked failed when ALL params had sections, thus thus fix simplifies the conditional to check if there are any params at all.

This can be reproduced with the following DAG:

from airflow.sdk import dag, task, Param


@dag(
    schedule=None,
    params=dict(
        test1=Param(
            title="test1",
            type="integer",
            default=0,
            section="TestSection",  # NOTE: Toggle this and observe as no parameters are displayed in trigger UI.
        ),
        test2=Param(
            title="test2",
            type="integer",
            default=0,
            section="TestSection",
        ),
    ),
)
def demonstrate_params_with_no_sections_no_param_render():
    """
    If a DAG has parameters all in-section, and none outside a section, the parameters will
    not render on the trigger UI modal.
    """

    @task
    def simple() -> None: ...

    simple()

demonstrate_params_with_no_sections_no_param_render()
Screenshot 2025-10-20 at 01 01 11

Note: This cannot be reproduced or validated with #56831 being merged.


^ 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 airflow-core/newsfragments.

The original logic checked failed when ALL params had sections, thus
thus fix simplifies the conditional to check if there are any params at all.
@boring-cyborg boring-cyborg bot added the area:UI Related to UI/UX. For Frontend Developers. label Oct 20, 2025
@jscheffl
Copy link
Contributor

Following to open the attached demo Dag I get:
image

@fredthomsen
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jscheffl yeah it's a stacked PR, dependent on #56831 being merged (I made that PR when investigating this issue). Should I base it off that branch and/or leave it as draft?

@bbovenzi bbovenzi modified the milestones: Airflow 3.2.0, Airflow 3.1.2 Oct 21, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@jscheffl jscheffl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

After the other PR merged... can confirmt he "stacking" helped and now the fix is working as expected. Thanks!

@jscheffl jscheffl added type:bug-fix Changelog: Bug Fixes backport-to-v3-1-test Mark PR with this label to backport to v3-1-test branch labels Oct 21, 2025
@jscheffl jscheffl modified the milestones: Airflow 3.2.0, Airflow 3.1.2 Oct 21, 2025
@jscheffl
Copy link
Contributor

I propose to back-port... or @bbovenzi anything speaking against back-porting?

@jscheffl jscheffl merged commit 02fef9d into apache:main Oct 21, 2025
60 checks passed
github-actions bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 21, 2025
…56870)

The original logic checked failed when ALL params had sections, thus
thus fix simplifies the conditional to check if there are any params at all.
(cherry picked from commit 02fef9d)

Co-authored-by: Fred Thomsen <me@fredthomsen.net>
@github-actions
Copy link

Backport successfully created: v3-1-test

Status Branch Result
v3-1-test PR Link

bbovenzi pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 21, 2025
…56870) (#56984)

The original logic checked failed when ALL params had sections, thus
thus fix simplifies the conditional to check if there are any params at all.
(cherry picked from commit 02fef9d)

Co-authored-by: Fred Thomsen <me@fredthomsen.net>
@bbovenzi bbovenzi modified the milestones: Airflow 3.1.2, Airflow 3.1.1 Oct 21, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

area:UI Related to UI/UX. For Frontend Developers. backport-to-v3-1-test Mark PR with this label to backport to v3-1-test branch type:bug-fix Changelog: Bug Fixes

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants