Attention weight $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$ is not, and need not to be, constrained in size.
For source sequence $\boldsymbol{x} = x_1\cdots x_{T_x}$ (where $T_x$ can vary from one source to another) and target sequence $\boldsymbol{y} = y_1...y_{T_y}$ (where $T_y$ can also vary from one target to another), weight $\boldsymbol{\alpha}_i = (\alpha_{i1},\cdots,\alpha_{iT_x})$ is calculated for target element $y_i$ as follows
$$\alpha_{ij}=\frac{\text{exp}(e_{ij})}{\sum_{k=1}^{T_x}\text{exp}(e_{ik})}$$
where $e_{ij}$ is calculated by neural network $a$ that receives hidden state $s_{i-1}$ of decoder (decoder generates the target sequence element-by-element) and hidden state $h_j$ of encoder (encoder distills the source sequence into hidden states $h_j$, where $h_j$ is the concatenation of $j$-th hidden states of forward and backward RNNs) and outputs
$$e_{ij} = a(s_{i-1}, h_j).$$
In other words, network $a$ recieves a vector of size $|s| + |h|$ and outputs a number. Because of this network, the attention matrix $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$ is free in size.
Attention weights are then used to calculate context $c_i$ for target $y_i$ as follows
$$c_i = \sum_{j=1}^{T_x} \alpha_{ij}h_j,$$
and so on and so forth.
Consequently, for the next (source, target) pair with lengths ($T_{x_2}$, $T_{y_2}$), the size of $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$ would also be $T_{y_2} \times T_{x_2}$ with no problem.