Skip to content

Comments

[AIRFLOW-3900] Error on undefined template variables in unit tests.#4719

Merged
feng-tao merged 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom
jmcarp:test-template-undefined
Feb 16, 2019
Merged

[AIRFLOW-3900] Error on undefined template variables in unit tests.#4719
feng-tao merged 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom
jmcarp:test-template-undefined

Conversation

@jmcarp
Copy link
Contributor

@jmcarp jmcarp commented Feb 16, 2019

Make sure you have checked all steps below.

Jira

  • My PR addresses the following Airflow Jira issues and references them in the PR title. For example, "[AIRFLOW-XXX] My Airflow PR"

Description

  • Here are some details about my PR, including screenshots of any UI changes:

Tests

  • My PR adds the following unit tests OR does not need testing for this extremely good reason:

Commits

  • My commits all reference Jira issues in their subject lines, and I have squashed multiple commits if they address the same issue. In addition, my commits follow the guidelines from "How to write a good git commit message":
    1. Subject is separated from body by a blank line
    2. Subject is limited to 50 characters (not including Jira issue reference)
    3. Subject does not end with a period
    4. Subject uses the imperative mood ("add", not "adding")
    5. Body wraps at 72 characters
    6. Body explains "what" and "why", not "how"

Documentation

  • In case of new functionality, my PR adds documentation that describes how to use it.
    • When adding new operators/hooks/sensors, the autoclass documentation generation needs to be added.
    • All the public functions and the classes in the PR contain docstrings that explain what it does

Code Quality

  • Passes flake8

@jmcarp jmcarp force-pushed the test-template-undefined branch from dc508b4 to 84bc790 Compare February 16, 2019 02:12
@jmcarp jmcarp force-pushed the test-template-undefined branch from 84bc790 to 4af1a73 Compare February 16, 2019 03:18
@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Feb 16, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #4719 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #4719   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   74.65%   74.65%           
=======================================
  Files         430      430           
  Lines       27974    27974           
=======================================
  Hits        20884    20884           
  Misses       7090     7090
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
airflow/contrib/operators/ssh_operator.py 82.05% <0%> (-1.29%) ⬇️
airflow/models/__init__.py 92.84% <0%> (+0.05%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6218d91...4af1a73. Read the comment docs.

@feng-tao feng-tao merged commit a758664 into apache:master Feb 16, 2019
antonimaciej pushed a commit to PolideaInternal/airflow that referenced this pull request Feb 26, 2019
@ashb
Copy link
Member

ashb commented Mar 19, 2019

This one doesn't seem like an easy one to cherry-pick in to 1.10.3, so we might leave it https://travis-ci.org/ashb/airflow/jobs/508434072

(I tried applying it to both flask-admin and FAB backends, and both of them had failures)

@jmcarp If you want this in 1.10.3 could you open a PR targeting the v1-10-stable branch please? Otherwise I'll mark at as 2.0.0 only.

@jmcarp
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmcarp commented Mar 19, 2019

I think it's fine to hold off until 2.0. My main goal here was to avoid template regressions, and as long as this commit is in master, I think we'll do that.

wmorris75 pushed a commit to modmed-external/incubator-airflow that referenced this pull request Jul 29, 2019
kaxil pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 22, 2020
potiuk pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 29, 2020
kaxil pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 1, 2020
cfei18 pushed a commit to cfei18/incubator-airflow that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2021
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.

4 participants