-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16.4k
Fix WasbPrefixSensor arg inconsistency between sync and async mode #36806
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
5d6bbe3 to
c5ef775
Compare
c5ef775 to
6790b5b
Compare
| include: list[str] | None = None, | ||
| delimiter: str = "/", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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) ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
public_readis not passed in sync mode whilecheck_optionsis 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.rstor{issue_number}.significant.rst, in newsfragments.