Added dagrun delete command to airflowctl

[justinpakzad]

---

Added dagrun delete command to airflowctl. Updated the DagRunOperations class with a new delete() method. Corresponding unit test was added. Updated the integration tests with the new command as well. I placed the delete after the xcom commands run in the test since they rely on a dag run.

Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?

• Yes (please specify the tool below)

---

• Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information. Note: commit author/co-author name and email in commits become permanently public when merged.
• For fundamental code changes, an Airflow Improvement Proposal (AIP) is needed.
• When adding dependency, check compliance with the ASF 3rd Party License Policy.
• For significant user-facing changes create newsfragment: {pr_number}.significant.rst, in airflow-core/newsfragments. You can add this file in a follow-up commit after the PR is created so you know the PR number.

[potiuk]

Clean, well-scoped addition — delete() follows the existing get/list operation pattern, the generated help artifacts are properly regenerated (not hand-edited), and the unit test covers the 204 path. Correctly no newsfragment for airflow-ctl.

The CI failure was just main-branch drift (Static checks / end-of-file-fixer on generated/provider_dependencies.json.sha256sum, which isn't part of this PR). I've rebased the branch onto latest main to clear it — once CI re-runs green, this looks good to merge.

---

This review was drafted by an AI-assisted tool and confirmed by an Apache Airflow maintainer. The findings below are observations, not blockers; an Apache Airflow maintainer — a real person — will take the next look at the PR. If you think a finding is mis-applied, please reply on the PR and a maintainer will weigh in.

More on how Apache Airflow handles maintainer review: contributing-docs/05_pull_requests.rst.

---

Drafted-by: Claude Code (Opus 4.8); reviewed by @potiuk before posting