Skip to content

Add back legacy .piprc customization for pip#21124

Merged
jedcunningham merged 1 commit intoapache:mainfrom
potiuk:add-back-legacy-piprc-feature-to-dockerfile
Jan 26, 2022
Merged

Add back legacy .piprc customization for pip#21124
jedcunningham merged 1 commit intoapache:mainfrom
potiuk:add-back-legacy-piprc-feature-to-dockerfile

Conversation

@potiuk
Copy link
Member

@potiuk potiuk commented Jan 26, 2022

This change brings back backwards compatibility to using .piprc
to customize Airflow Image. Some older vrsions of pip used .piprc
(even though documentation about is difficult to find now) and we
used to support this option. With #20445, we changed to use
(fully documented) pip.conf option, however if someone used
.piprc before to customize their image, this change would break it.

The PR brings back also the .piprc option to the image (even if
it is not really clear whether current and future versions of pip
will support it.


^ Add meaningful description above

Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information.
In case of fundamental code change, 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 UPDATING.md.

This change brings back backwards compatibility to using .piprc
to customize Airflow Image. Some older vrsions of pip used .piprc
(even though documentation about is difficult to find now) and we
used to support this option. With apache#20445, we changed to use
(fully documented) ``pip.conf`` option, however if someone used
.piprc before to customize their image, this change would break it.

The PR brings back also the .piprc option to the image (even if
it is not really clear whether current and future versions of pip
will support it.
@potiuk potiuk requested review from ashb and mik-laj as code owners January 26, 2022 11:35
@boring-cyborg boring-cyborg bot added area:production-image Production image improvements and fixes kind:documentation labels Jan 26, 2022
@potiuk potiuk added this to the Airflow 2.2.4 milestone Jan 26, 2022
@potiuk
Copy link
Member Author

potiuk commented Jan 26, 2022

@jedcunningham - as discussed - we should cherry-pick that change for 2.1.4 to make sure there are no backwards-compaatibility problems.

@potiuk potiuk requested a review from kaxil January 26, 2022 11:36
@github-actions
Copy link

The PR most likely needs to run full matrix of tests because it modifies parts of the core of Airflow. However, committers might decide to merge it quickly and take the risk. If they don't merge it quickly - please rebase it to the latest main at your convenience, or amend the last commit of the PR, and push it with --force-with-lease.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the full tests needed We need to run full set of tests for this PR to merge label Jan 26, 2022
@jedcunningham jedcunningham merged commit d5a9edf into apache:main Jan 26, 2022
@jedcunningham jedcunningham added the changelog:skip Changes that should be skipped from the changelog (CI, tests, etc..) label Jan 26, 2022
jedcunningham pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 26, 2022
This change brings back backwards compatibility to using .piprc
to customize Airflow Image. Some older vrsions of pip used .piprc
(even though documentation about is difficult to find now) and we
used to support this option. With #20445, we changed to use
(fully documented) ``pip.conf`` option, however if someone used
.piprc before to customize their image, this change would break it.

The PR brings back also the .piprc option to the image (even if
it is not really clear whether current and future versions of pip
will support it.

(cherry picked from commit d5a9edf)
jedcunningham pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 27, 2022
This change brings back backwards compatibility to using .piprc
to customize Airflow Image. Some older vrsions of pip used .piprc
(even though documentation about is difficult to find now) and we
used to support this option. With #20445, we changed to use
(fully documented) ``pip.conf`` option, however if someone used
.piprc before to customize their image, this change would break it.

The PR brings back also the .piprc option to the image (even if
it is not really clear whether current and future versions of pip
will support it.

(cherry picked from commit d5a9edf)
jedcunningham pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 28, 2022
This change brings back backwards compatibility to using .piprc
to customize Airflow Image. Some older vrsions of pip used .piprc
(even though documentation about is difficult to find now) and we
used to support this option. With #20445, we changed to use
(fully documented) ``pip.conf`` option, however if someone used
.piprc before to customize their image, this change would break it.

The PR brings back also the .piprc option to the image (even if
it is not really clear whether current and future versions of pip
will support it.

(cherry picked from commit d5a9edf)
jedcunningham pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 17, 2022
This change brings back backwards compatibility to using .piprc
to customize Airflow Image. Some older vrsions of pip used .piprc
(even though documentation about is difficult to find now) and we
used to support this option. With #20445, we changed to use
(fully documented) ``pip.conf`` option, however if someone used
.piprc before to customize their image, this change would break it.

The PR brings back also the .piprc option to the image (even if
it is not really clear whether current and future versions of pip
will support it.

(cherry picked from commit d5a9edf)
@potiuk potiuk deleted the add-back-legacy-piprc-feature-to-dockerfile branch July 29, 2022 20:03
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

area:production-image Production image improvements and fixes changelog:skip Changes that should be skipped from the changelog (CI, tests, etc..) full tests needed We need to run full set of tests for this PR to merge kind:documentation

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants