Removed dags are not deactivated when upgrading from 2.x to 3.0.6

[deepak4babu]

Apache Airflow version

Other Airflow 3 version (please specify below)

If "Other Airflow 3 version" selected, which one?

3.0.6

What happened?

When upgrading airflow from 2.x to 3.06 and some dags are removed at the same time. The removed dags are not deactivated.

We use the default config values.

We suspect that the issue is due to null bundle_name for the removed dags as dags without bundle_names are not scanned for deactivation.

What you think should happen instead?

The removed dags should be deactivated and should be cleared from UI.

How to reproduce

Create a 2.x airflow enviroment with some dags. Upgrade the env to 3.0.6 and remove the dags at the same time.

Operating System

Debian GNU/Linux 12 (bookworm)

Versions of Apache Airflow Providers

apache-airflow-providers-celery==3.12.2
apache-airflow-providers-cncf-kubernetes==10.8.2
apache-airflow-providers-common-compat==1.7.3
apache-airflow-providers-common-io==1.6.2
apache-airflow-providers-common-sql==1.27.5
apache-airflow-providers-fab==2.4.1
apache-airflow-providers-ftp==3.13.2
apache-airflow-providers-http==5.3.3
apache-airflow-providers-imap==3.9.2
apache-airflow-providers-postgres==6.2.3
apache-airflow-providers-smtp==2.2.0
apache-airflow-providers-sqlite==4.1.2
apache-airflow-providers-standard==1.6.0

Deployment

Other

Deployment details

No response

Anything else?

No response

Are you willing to submit PR?

• Yes I am willing to submit a PR!

Code of Conduct

• I agree to follow this project's Code of Conduct

[kalluripradeep]

Hi! I'd like to work on this issue.

Based on the description, it seems the deactivation logic in 3.x needs to handle DAGs with null bundle_name (from 2.x upgrades). I'll investigate the deactivation code and submit a fix.

Thanks!

[potiuk]

@kalluripradeep We are unassigning you from this issue as part of our updated assignment policy.

This is not meant to discourage your contribution — quite the opposite! You are still very welcome to work on this issue and submit a PR for it. Simply comment that you are working on it and open a PR when ready.

We found that formal assignments were not working well, as they often prevented others from contributing when the assignee was not actively working on the issue.

[kalluripradeep]

@kalluripradeep We are unassigning you from this issue as part of our updated assignment policy.

This is not meant to discourage your contribution — quite the opposite! You are still very welcome to work on this issue and submit a PR for it. Simply comment that you are working on it and open a PR when ready.

We found that formal assignments were not working well, as they often prevented others from contributing when the assignee was not actively working on the issue.

Thank you for this @potiuk , can you please look at this #61019, I have a PR on this, are you able to review this