Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix WasbPrefixSensor arg inconsistency between sync and async mode #36806

Conversation

Lee-W
Copy link
Member

@Lee-W Lee-W commented Jan 16, 2024

public_read is not passed in sync mode while check_options is not used in async mode


^ 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.

@Lee-W Lee-W changed the title Fix WasbPrefixSensor arg inconsistency bewteen sync and async mode Fix WasbPrefixSensor arg inconsistency between sync and async mode Jan 16, 2024
@Lee-W Lee-W force-pushed the fix-WasbPrefixSensor-arg-inconsistency-bewteen-sync-and-async branch from 5d6bbe3 to c5ef775 Compare January 16, 2024 09:49
@Lee-W Lee-W force-pushed the fix-WasbPrefixSensor-arg-inconsistency-bewteen-sync-and-async branch from c5ef775 to 6790b5b Compare January 16, 2024 09:51
@potiuk potiuk merged commit 5305f4b into apache:main Jan 16, 2024
55 checks passed
Comment on lines -113 to -114
include: list[str] | None = None,
delimiter: str = "/",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Would these arguments now need to be passed in under check_options? And would this call for this PR to be included in a major release considering it could be a breaking change(assuming we call Triggerers as public interfaces)?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Would these arguments now need to be passed in under check_options?

Yes

And would this call for this PR to be included in a major release considering it could be a breaking change(assuming we call Triggerers as public interfaces)?

Hm.... in this case , maybe this is needed as well 🤔

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@eladkal @potiuk would like to hear your thoughts on whether we would need to consider this for a major release of the microsoft azure provider.

Copy link
Contributor

@eladkal eladkal Jan 20, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I will skip azure from next release wave.
We also have #36622 (comment) which is going to be breaking change as well so we can just mark both as breaking change.

@Lee-W Can you please follow what I wrote in #36622 (comment) ?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sure! Will create a pr for this

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@pankajastro pankajastro deleted the fix-WasbPrefixSensor-arg-inconsistency-bewteen-sync-and-async branch January 30, 2024 11:12
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.

5 participants