Enable explicit namespaces #42951
Merged
Enable explicit namespaces #42951
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
… namespaces for at least some IDEs (PyChasrm for sure, possibly others).
ashb
reviewed
Oct 11, 2024
Co-authored-by: Ash Berlin-Taylor <[email protected]>
|
@ferruzzi Just wanted to let you know, the lowest direct dependency test failures are in microsoft provider, it is due to recent release of microsoft-kiota-http. imports are not working. am trying to fix these deps on different pr. |
|
I got caught up trying to fix a merge conflict in another PR, I'll get this one sorted out now. Sorry for the holdup. |
kaxil
reviewed
Oct 11, 2024
|
There's an error when using It seems that after applying the changes and running this command, it creates an extra This file should be added to the |
shahar1
reviewed
Oct 15, 2024
potiuk
reviewed
Oct 15, 2024
|
You need to rebase @ferruzzi -> all the problems you see in here have been solved in main. |
Co-authored-by: Shahar Epstein <[email protected]>
|
Alright. This is all green, up-to-date, and typo-free. |
vincbeck
approved these changes
Oct 15, 2024
shahar1
approved these changes
Oct 16, 2024
R7L208
pushed a commit
to R7L208/airflow
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 17, 2024
* The recent PR to reorganize the package requires a change to explicit namespaces for at least some IDEs (PyChasrm for sure, possibly others). * static fixes * Update providers/src/airflow/providers/__init__.py Co-authored-by: Ash Berlin-Taylor <[email protected]> * Remove duplicate line * Rephrase relevant comments * Add providers tests init file to autoapi_ignore * typo Co-authored-by: Shahar Epstein <[email protected]> --------- Co-authored-by: Ash Berlin-Taylor <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Shahar Epstein <[email protected]>
potiuk
added a commit
to potiuk/airflow
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 18, 2024
Cleans-up airflow and providers `__init__.py" files in order to get providers import work again. This is done by excluding the two `__init__.py` files from automated ruff isort rules adding `from __future__ import annotations`. Also removed the `__init__.py` file from "providers" directory, it is not needed there, because "providers" is just a folder where we keep provider files, it's not a Python package. That should finally get rid of the Intellij teething import problem that has been introduced in apache#42505. There were earlier - unsuccesful - attempts to fix it in the apache#43116 and apache#43081 that followed apache#42951 - but the key is that Pycharm requires the namespace's extend_path to be first "real" line of code in the `__init__.py` to understand that the package is an "explicit" namespace package - and it conflicts with the requirement of "from __future__ import annotations" to be the first line of Python code.
potiuk
added a commit
to potiuk/airflow
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 18, 2024
Cleans-up airflow and providers `__init__.py" files in order to get providers import work again. This is done by excluding the two `__init__.py` files from automated ruff isort rules adding `from __future__ import annotations`. Also removed the `__init__.py` file from "providers" directory, it is not needed there, because "providers" is just a folder where we keep provider files, it's not a Python package. That should finally get rid of the Intellij teething import problem that has been introduced in apache#42505. There were earlier - unsuccesful - attempts to fix it in the apache#43116 and apache#43081 that followed apache#42951 - but the key is that Pycharm requires the namespace's extend_path to be first "real" line of code in the `__init__.py` to understand that the package is an "explicit" namespace package - and it conflicts with the requirement of "from __future__ import annotations" to be the first line of Python code. Also this PR fixes a few other teething problems with setup of tests that were introcuded in apache#42505 and #43802 "masked" by having `__init__.py` added in providers package: * openlineage extractor test that should not expect "providers.tests.*" but "tests.*" package * common_sql_api_stubs wrongly calculating generated path for stub-generated files * pytest_plugin expecting .asf.yml in "airflow" sources - even during compatibility tests with older version of airflow (where the .asf.yml is not present)
potiuk
added a commit
to potiuk/airflow
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 18, 2024
Cleans-up airflow and providers `__init__.py" files in order to get providers import work again. This is done by excluding the two `__init__.py` files from automated ruff isort rules adding `from __future__ import annotations`. Also removed the `__init__.py` file from "providers" directory, it is not needed there, because "providers" is just a folder where we keep provider files, it's not a Python package. That should finally get rid of the Intellij teething import problem that has been introduced in apache#42505. There were earlier - unsuccesful - attempts to fix it in the apache#43116 and apache#43081 that followed apache#42951 - but the key is that Pycharm requires the namespace's extend_path to be first "real" line of code in the `__init__.py` to understand that the package is an "explicit" namespace package - and it conflicts with the requirement of "from __future__ import annotations" to be the first line of Python code. Also this PR fixes a few other teething problems with setup of tests that were introcuded in apache#42505 and #43802 "masked" by having `__init__.py` added in providers package: * common.sql interface pre-commit used wrong path to generated files * openlineage extractor test that should not expect "providers.tests.*" but "tests.*" package * common_sql_api_stubs wrongly calculating generated path for stub-generated files * pytest_plugin expecting .asf.yml in "airflow" sources - even during compatibility tests with older version of airflow (where the .asf.yml is not present)
kaxil
pushed a commit
to potiuk/airflow
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 18, 2024
Cleans-up airflow and providers `__init__.py" files in order to get providers import work again. This is done by excluding the two `__init__.py` files from automated ruff isort rules adding `from __future__ import annotations`. Also removed the `__init__.py` file from "providers" directory, it is not needed there, because "providers" is just a folder where we keep provider files, it's not a Python package. That should finally get rid of the Intellij teething import problem that has been introduced in apache#42505. There were earlier - unsuccesful - attempts to fix it in the apache#43116 and apache#43081 that followed apache#42951 - but the key is that Pycharm requires the namespace's extend_path to be first "real" line of code in the `__init__.py` to understand that the package is an "explicit" namespace package - and it conflicts with the requirement of "from __future__ import annotations" to be the first line of Python code. Also this PR fixes a few other teething problems with setup of tests that were introcuded in apache#42505 and #43802 "masked" by having `__init__.py` added in providers package: * common.sql interface pre-commit used wrong path to generated files * openlineage extractor test that should not expect "providers.tests.*" but "tests.*" package * common_sql_api_stubs wrongly calculating generated path for stub-generated files * pytest_plugin expecting .asf.yml in "airflow" sources - even during compatibility tests with older version of airflow (where the .asf.yml is not present)
kaxil
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 18, 2024
…3173) Cleans-up airflow and providers `__init__.py" files in order to get providers import work again. This is done by excluding the two `__init__.py` files from automated ruff isort rules adding `from __future__ import annotations`. That should finally get rid of the Intellij teething import problem that has been introduced in #42505. There were earlier - unsuccessful - attempts to fix it in the #43116 and #43081 that followed #42951 - but the key is that Pycharm requires the namespace's extend_path to be first "real" line of code in the `__init__.py` to understand that the package is an "explicit" namespace package - and it conflicts with the requirement of "from __future__ import annotations" to be the first line of Python code. Also this PR fixes following problem: * pytest_plugin expecting .asf.yml in "airflow" sources - even during compatibility tests with older version of airflow (where the .asf.yml is not present) --------- Co-authored-by: Kaxil Naik <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The recent PR to reorganize the package requires a change to explicit namespaces for at least some IDEs (PyCharm for sure, possibly others).
^ 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.rstor{issue_number}.significant.rst, in newsfragments.