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

Correct question type for prepare-provider-documentation #43417

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 29, 2024

Conversation

amoghrajesh
Copy link
Contributor

For the provider doc preparation, the qn that asked to confirm if we have any changes apart from doc-only didn't acknowledge N option.

Does the provider: airbyte have any changes apart from 'doc-only'?
Press y/N/q: N

Define the type of change for `Split providers out of the main "airflow/" tree into a UV workspace project (https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/42505)` by referring to the above table
Type of change (b)ugfix, (f)eature, (x)breaking change, (m)misc, (s)kip, (q)uit ? ^C

Summary of prepared documentation:

Corrected the qn function to fix it.

Does the provider: airbyte have any changes apart from 'doc-only'?
Press y/N/q: N
answer is Answer.NO True
Marking last change: 857ca4c06c and all above changes since the last release as doc-only changes!


Summary of prepared documentation:

Docs only: 1

airbyte


Successfully prepared documentation for packages!

^ 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.

@potiuk
Copy link
Member

potiuk commented Oct 27, 2024

I think you should remove those HASH file modifications :)

@potiuk
Copy link
Member

potiuk commented Oct 27, 2024

Looks like they were added by pre-commit while the source for breeze has not been committed :). Making sure that you do not have any modified file and running pre-commit run update-breeze-cmd-output --all-files should fix things.

Just make sure you have no non-added changes in your workspace.

@amoghrajesh
Copy link
Contributor Author

@potiuk I tried it out, it doesn't generate anything:

(apache-airflow) ➜  airflow git:(correctWrongAnsType) pre-commit  run update-breeze-cmd-output --all-files
Update breeze docs.......................................................Passed

Moreover, also tried force pushing the change only, still running into this

@potiuk
Copy link
Member

potiuk commented Oct 28, 2024

Maybe try to reinstall your pre-commit/breeze - maybe it is still installed with python 3.8 (though it should not change too much) . I cannot push a fixup to your branch, but I have exactly the same hashes as the one that are on the server- somehow the hashes in your version are calcualated differently..

@amoghrajesh
Copy link
Contributor Author

Let me try reinstalling, looks to me that it installed an "older" breeze when I was playing around with some really "old" branch!

@amoghrajesh
Copy link
Contributor Author

CI is green, merging.

@amoghrajesh amoghrajesh merged commit cfae566 into apache:main Oct 29, 2024
82 checks passed
ephraimbuddy pushed a commit to astronomer/airflow that referenced this pull request Oct 29, 2024
@potiuk
Copy link
Member

potiuk commented Oct 29, 2024

Let me try reinstalling, looks to me that it installed an "older" breeze when I was playing around with some really "old" branch!

That could be - at some point in time i added the change that automatically breeze reinstalls if an older version is used - without even asking the user - it just reinstalls itself, but if you had REALLLY old version of breeze that did not have this mechanism, then yeah - hash calculation changed at some point in time so it could be different.

ellisms pushed a commit to ellisms/airflow that referenced this pull request Nov 13, 2024
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