Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[AIRFLOW-XXX] Update docs with new BranchPythonOperator behaviour #4682

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 12, 2019
Merged

[AIRFLOW-XXX] Update docs with new BranchPythonOperator behaviour #4682

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 12, 2019

Conversation

BasPH
Copy link
Contributor

@BasPH BasPH commented Feb 10, 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:

After #4666 the docs had to be updated to explain the BranchPythonOperator correctly:

image

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

.. image:: img/branch_bad.png
Paths of the branching task are ``branch_a``, ``join`` and ``branch_b``. Since
``join`` is a downstream task of ``branch_a``, it will be excluded from the skipped
tasks when ``branch_a`` is selected by the Python function.
Copy link
Contributor

@Fokko Fokko Feb 10, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would say is returned by the Python callable instead of is selected by the Python function.

to keep using the same wording.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good point, fixed.

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Feb 10, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #4682 into master will decrease coverage by 1.17%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #4682      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   74.35%   73.17%   -1.18%     
==========================================
  Files         430      432       +2     
  Lines       27962    28414     +452     
==========================================
+ Hits        20790    20791       +1     
- Misses       7172     7623     +451
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
airflow/contrib/hooks/databricks_hook.py 70.58% <0%> (-24.99%) ⬇️
airflow/executors/celery_executor.py 56.41% <0%> (-20.52%) ⬇️
airflow/sensors/external_task_sensor.py 76.47% <0%> (-19.83%) ⬇️
airflow/contrib/hooks/bigquery_hook.py 41.35% <0%> (-16.72%) ⬇️
airflow/contrib/hooks/spark_submit_hook.py 71.05% <0%> (-9.04%) ⬇️
airflow/contrib/utils/mlengine_operator_utils.py 0% <0%> (ø)
...rflow/contrib/utils/mlengine_prediction_summary.py 0% <0%> (ø)
airflow/models/__init__.py 92.79% <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 59d2615...cc6b88e. Read the comment docs.

@OmerJog
Copy link
Contributor

OmerJog commented Feb 11, 2019

The previous PR is irrelevant?
#4388

@zhongjiajie
Copy link
Member

@BasPH FYI, CI test failed, submit PR to try again.

@Fokko
Copy link
Contributor

Fokko commented Feb 12, 2019

@zhongjiajie I've restarted the failed job.

Copy link
Contributor

@Fokko Fokko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for giving some love to the documentation @BasPH

@Fokko Fokko merged commit e442d05 into apache:master Feb 12, 2019
wmorris75 pushed a commit to modmed/incubator-airflow that referenced this pull request Jul 29, 2019
potiuk pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 21, 2020
kaxil pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 22, 2020
kaxil pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 23, 2020
potiuk pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 26, 2020
kaxil pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 26, 2020
kaxil pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2020
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.

5 participants