Skip to content

[AIP-94] Mark tasks CLI commands as migrated to airflowctl - #69274

Merged
potiuk merged 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
YAshhh29:mark-tasks-migrated-to-airflowctl
Jul 30, 2026
Merged

[AIP-94] Mark tasks CLI commands as migrated to airflowctl#69274
potiuk merged 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
YAshhh29:mark-tasks-migrated-to-airflowctl

Conversation

@YAshhh29

@YAshhh29 YAshhh29 commented Jul 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Add the @deprecated_for_airflowctl marker decorator to the 5 tasks CLI
commands that have airflowctl equivalents:

  • tasks failed-deps
  • tasks state
  • tasks list
  • tasks states-for-dag-run
  • tasks clear

This follows the simplified marker-only direction described in #68402
(comment by @bugraoz93) and the same pattern as #68932 (variables) and
#68958 (config).

related: #68402

@boring-cyborg

boring-cyborg Bot commented Jul 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Congratulations on your first Pull Request and welcome to the Apache Airflow community! If you have any issues or are unsure about any anything please check our Contributors' Guide
Here are some useful points:

  • Pay attention to the quality of your code (ruff, mypy and type annotations). Our prek-hooks will help you with that.
  • In case of a new feature add useful documentation (in docstrings or in docs/ directory). Adding a new operator? Check this short guide Consider adding an example Dag that shows how users should use it.
  • Consider using Breeze environment for testing locally, it's a heavy docker but it ships with a working Airflow and a lot of integrations.
  • Be patient and persistent. It might take some time to get a review or get the final approval from Committers.
  • Please follow ASF Code of Conduct for all communication including (but not limited to) comments on Pull Requests, Mailing list and Slack.
  • Be sure to read the Airflow Coding style.
  • Always keep your Pull Requests rebased, otherwise your build might fail due to changes not related to your commits.
    Apache Airflow is a community-driven project and together we are making it better 🚀.
    In case of doubts contact the developers at:
    Mailing List: dev@airflow.apache.org
    Slack: https://s.apache.org/airflow-slack

@bugraoz93 bugraoz93 left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thrse still need parity in airflowctl. Only a couple left but we should wait those for tasks. Thanks for the PR

@YAshhh29

YAshhh29 commented Jul 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Thanks for the review and the context! That makes sense — I'll keep this PR open so it's ready to merge as soon as the remaining [airflowctl tasks] commands land and parity is complete. Happy to help implement any of those if it'd be useful.

@YAshhh29
YAshhh29 requested a review from bugraoz93 July 4, 2026 19:04
@potiuk potiuk added the ready for maintainer review Set after triaging when all criteria pass. label Jul 11, 2026
@YAshhh29
YAshhh29 force-pushed the mark-tasks-migrated-to-airflowctl branch from 3aa4120 to f7b8893 Compare July 23, 2026 15:30

@potiuk potiuk left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks — marker-only change, and the decorator ordering matches the existing task_states_for_dag_run / task_clear entries, with the registry test updated alongside. Straightforward.

One process question, not a blocker since deprecated_for_airflowctl is explicitly maintainer-facing and renders nothing to users: of the three targets named here, only states-for-dag-run is currently in TASK_COMMANDSairflowctl tasks failed-deps, tasks state and tasks list don't exist on main yet (they're #69397, #70276 and #70472, all still open). tasks clear is already marked the same way, so this is clearly the established batching pattern rather than something new here.

Is the intent that the marker leads the implementation and the registry records "claimed for airflowctl" rather than "available in airflowctl"? If so this is fine as-is; if the registry is meant to reflect what actually ships, it might be worth landing these markers behind their respective command PRs. Either way I'm happy for it to go in — just want the convention written down somewhere if it isn't already.


Drafted-by: Claude Code (Opus 5); reviewed by @potiuk before posting

@potiuk
potiuk merged commit f0d50bd into apache:main Jul 30, 2026
73 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

area:CLI ready for maintainer review Set after triaging when all criteria pass.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants