Skip to content

Conversation

@kaxil
Copy link
Member

@kaxil kaxil commented Apr 10, 2025

This isn't true anymore


^ 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.

@jedcunningham
Copy link
Member

We should probably add the same into the provider itself now though?

@kaxil
Copy link
Member Author

kaxil commented Apr 10, 2025

We should probably add the same into the provider itself now though?

Don't think it is needed. It was added when we sort of vendored few things in #16647

@kaxil
Copy link
Member Author

kaxil commented Apr 10, 2025

Let me handle that separately for FAB, we might still need it as this file still has lot of vendored code.

@vincbeck
Copy link
Contributor

Let me handle that separately for FAB, we might still need it as this file still has lot of vendored code.

Yes, a lot of code in FAB provider has been vendored in from FAB

This isn't true anymore
@kaxil kaxil force-pushed the remove-fab-entry branch from aba8a33 to d2efb78 Compare April 15, 2025 13:59
@kaxil kaxil merged commit 4c65dc6 into apache:main Apr 15, 2025
42 of 46 checks passed
@kaxil kaxil deleted the remove-fab-entry branch April 15, 2025 14:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants