Ask for provider versions in bug reports #17480
Conversation
We get a lot of bug reports for providers, and it's rare that the versions being used are in the initial report. Let's ask for them.
|
The PR is likely ready to be merged. No tests are needed as no important environment files, nor python files were modified by it. However, committers might decide that full test matrix is needed and add the 'full tests needed' label. Then you should rebase it to the latest main or amend the last commit of the PR, and push it with --force-with-lease. |
github-actions
bot
added
the
okay to merge
| @@ -36,6 +36,13 @@ These questions are the first thing we need to know to understand the context. | |||
|
|
|||
| **Apache Airflow version**: | |||
|
|
|||
| **Apache Airflow Provider versions** (please include all providers that are relevant to your bug): | |||
|
|
|||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually better advice will be 'airflow providers list' command output
There was a problem hiding this comment.
TIL. That said, I think I prefer the output from pip as it doesn't have the description (assuming folks will copy/paste most likely). Thoughts?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The one difference is that providers list might contain more than community providers. Those are all registered ones which is discovered by scanning the entrypoints.
For issues in community we indeed care more about the community ones though. So i think both are fine and agree that description is not really needed in this case so pip freeze will do its job well.
One other difference that airflow providers works also when you use INSTALL_PROVIDERS_FROM_SOURCES flag and providers are discovered from local sources rather than from packages (but this is not our case here)
We get a lot of bug reports for providers, and it's rare that the
versions being used are in the initial report. Let's ask for them.