Skip to content

Clean redundant Webserver configs #49896

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

Closed
kaxil opened this issue Apr 28, 2025 · 8 comments · Fixed by #50896
Closed

Clean redundant Webserver configs #49896

kaxil opened this issue Apr 28, 2025 · 8 comments · Fixed by #50896
Assignees
Labels
affected_version:3.0 Issues Reported for 3.0 area:webserver Webserver related Issues kind:meta High-level information important to the community

Comments

@kaxil
Copy link
Member

kaxil commented Apr 28, 2025

We replaced Websever with API server serving static JS in Airflow 3.0 and hence removed lot of Webserver configuration. However, the following configuration still exists, and I think most, if not al,l can be nuked

@kaxil kaxil added affected_version:3.0 Issues Reported for 3.0 kind:meta High-level information important to the community labels Apr 28, 2025
@dosubot dosubot bot added the area:webserver Webserver related Issues label Apr 28, 2025
@pierrejeambrun
Copy link
Member

Some of them are still used and more complicated to remove/migrate, I'll do them in separate PRs. (part are fab provider, part is core etc.)

@pierrejeambrun
Copy link
Member

@kaxil I just realized that now that we moved some pieces from webserver to api. (targetted for 3.1.0), people upgrading from 3.0.0 to 3.1.0 will need to config lint again because otherwise their config will not have that api section that core is now looking for, and will most likely crash.

Is that acceptable, what do you think is the best way. (I know this isn't great, but I couldn't find a better option, or we still look for webserver section but this will emit deprecation warning, until AF4...)

@pierrejeambrun
Copy link
Member

cc: @potiuk @jedcunningham

@potiuk
Copy link
Member

potiuk commented May 19, 2025

Is that acceptable, what do you think is the best way. (I know this isn't great, but I couldn't find a better option, or we still look for webserver section but this will emit deprecation warning, until AF4...)

Yes. We should deprecate those.

@pierrejeambrun
Copy link
Member

pierrejeambrun commented May 19, 2025

Yes. We should deprecate those.

So core should still be looking for webserver.my_config (old location) ?

What about configs moved to providers, is that the same, provider should still look for webserver even if it's expected to be in fab now ? Or since we introduced a lower bound on both side (core => provider, provider => core) we can assume that the config section will be up to date ?

@kaxil
Copy link
Member Author

kaxil commented May 19, 2025

Yeah for ones where we do still use those config, we should deprecate them first unfortunately

@pierrejeambrun
Copy link
Member

pierrejeambrun commented May 19, 2025

My bad, sorry for the confusion, double checked with Jed, yes those will raise deprecation warnings for core moved in core.

@potiuk
Copy link
Member

potiuk commented May 19, 2025

My bad, sorry for the confusion, double checked with Jed, yes those will raise deprecation warnings for core moved in core.

Yeah. Core to Core is straightforward - > core to fab requires bumping min version(s), really - that's the simplest way, another option is to add a code in fab provider to manually fallback to the old webserver settings with deprecations.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
affected_version:3.0 Issues Reported for 3.0 area:webserver Webserver related Issues kind:meta High-level information important to the community
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants