Fix XCom object storage backend path validation#56244
Merged
amoghrajesh merged 1 commit intoapache:mainfrom Sep 30, 2025
Merged
Fix XCom object storage backend path validation#56244amoghrajesh merged 1 commit intoapache:mainfrom
amoghrajesh merged 1 commit intoapache:mainfrom
Conversation
eladkal
approved these changes
Sep 30, 2025
dabla
pushed a commit
to dabla/airflow
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 12, 2025
69 tasks
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
universal_pathlibreleases a 0.3.0 version and that addedpathlib_abc==0.5.1in it, which introduced stricter type checking on Path objects.The original code was calling
is_relative_to()incorrectly onPathobjects leading to error:I have changed to call it as an instance method on the ObjectStoragePath object itself.
^ 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 airflow-core/newsfragments.