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

Move databricks provider to new structure #46207

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

josix
Copy link
Contributor

@josix josix commented Jan 28, 2025

related: #46045

  • fix unit tests

^ 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.

@@ -357,10 +357,13 @@ def move_provider_yaml(provider_id: str) -> tuple[list[str], list[str], list[str
dependencies = []
optional_dependencies = []
devel_dependencies = []
copied_logo = set()
Copy link
Contributor Author

@josix josix Jan 28, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fix the FileNotFoundException that occurs when attempting to delete a moved logo in the integrations section, where multiple logos are present.

@potiuk potiuk force-pushed the refactor/move-databricks-provider-to-new-structure branch 2 times, most recently from ba47389 to 47e80ce Compare January 30, 2025 03:50
@potiuk
Copy link
Member

potiuk commented Jan 30, 2025

conflicts again (but I hope this time things will be green).

@josix josix force-pushed the refactor/move-databricks-provider-to-new-structure branch from 47e80ce to ddd7062 Compare January 30, 2025 09:21
@josix
Copy link
Contributor Author

josix commented Jan 30, 2025

Thanks! Let me fix this first, I guess the patch for move_providers.py might affect other providers.

@josix josix force-pushed the refactor/move-databricks-provider-to-new-structure branch from ddd7062 to a251efc Compare January 30, 2025 10:36
@potiuk
Copy link
Member

potiuk commented Jan 30, 2025

Thanks! Let me fix this first, I guess the patch for move_providers.py might affect other providers.

Cool :)

@josix josix force-pushed the refactor/move-databricks-provider-to-new-structure branch from a251efc to c938dcb Compare January 30, 2025 17:18
Copy link
Contributor

@o-nikolas o-nikolas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think you just barely missed a fix in main when you rebased an hour ago 😢

@josix josix force-pushed the refactor/move-databricks-provider-to-new-structure branch from c938dcb to 6906290 Compare January 30, 2025 19:14
@josix
Copy link
Contributor Author

josix commented Jan 30, 2025

Hmmm... I rebased after #46291 merged, and it indeed fixed the issues that caused the previous failed tests in cncf.kubernetes and microsoft.azure related to time.sleep. However, it looks like this is a different issue, and all the failed tests are using caplog (not related 🤔) .

@potiuk potiuk force-pushed the refactor/move-databricks-provider-to-new-structure branch from 732343e to 8bc5b21 Compare January 31, 2025 13:50
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.

3 participants