Skip to content

Conversation

@amoghrajesh
Copy link
Contributor

We do not need to import it this way when we are anyways deprecating it using add_deprecated_classes


^ 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.rst or {issue_number}.significant.rst, in airflow-core/newsfragments.

@amoghrajesh amoghrajesh requested review from kaxil and potiuk May 10, 2025 11:25
@amoghrajesh amoghrajesh added this to the Airflow 3.0.2 milestone May 12, 2025
Co-authored-by: Kaxil Naik <[email protected]>
@amoghrajesh amoghrajesh requested a review from kaxil May 12, 2025 10:30
@jedcunningham
Copy link
Member

Feels like this might be better for 3.1 instead of 3.0.2?

@amoghrajesh amoghrajesh added the backport-to-v3-1-test Mark PR with this label to backport to v3-1-test branch label May 14, 2025
@amoghrajesh
Copy link
Contributor Author

@kaxil can we merge this? Should it be 3.0.2 or 3.1? I added backport labels

@kaxil kaxil removed the backport-to-v3-1-test Mark PR with this label to backport to v3-1-test branch label May 14, 2025
@kaxil kaxil modified the milestones: Airflow 3.0.2, Airflow 3.1.0 May 14, 2025
@kaxil kaxil merged commit 26a7c12 into apache:main May 14, 2025
53 checks passed
sanederchik pushed a commit to sanederchik/airflow that referenced this pull request Jun 7, 2025
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