Skip to content
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

Add missing constraint to markupsafe 2.1.0 build 0 #283

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 16, 2022

Conversation

saraedum
Copy link
Member

@saraedum saraedum commented Jun 16, 2022

markupsafe 2.1.0 build 0 is missing a constraint that was introduced in build 1. This allows installation of markupsafe 2.1.0 with jinja2=2 from the defaults channel.

I guess this cannot happen when strict channel priority is set but should it be fixed anyway?

Fixes conda-forge/markupsafe-feedstock#29

@conda-forge/markupsafe @xylar please have a look :)

show_diff.py produces the following output for me:
noarch::dropbox-11.32.0-pyhd8ed1ab_0.tar.bz2
-    "python =2.7|>=3.4",
+    "python ==2.7.*|>=3.4",
linux-64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py310h5764c6d_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
linux-64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py37h0313132_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
linux-64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py37h540881e_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
linux-64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py38h0a891b7_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
linux-64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py39hb9d737c_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
linux-aarch64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py310hdc54845_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
linux-aarch64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py37hb829d83_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
linux-aarch64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py37heeccf27_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
linux-aarch64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py38h81aae68_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
linux-aarch64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py39hb9a1dbb_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
linux-ppc64le::markupsafe-2.1.0-py310h93ff066_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
linux-ppc64le::markupsafe-2.1.0-py37h322088c_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
linux-ppc64le::markupsafe-2.1.0-py37hbdc9092_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
linux-ppc64le::markupsafe-2.1.0-py38h6e87771_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
linux-ppc64le::markupsafe-2.1.0-py39h9ca6cee_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]

osx-64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py310h1961e1f_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
osx-64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py37h69ee0a8_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
osx-64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py37h9205ac6_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
osx-64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py38hed1de0f_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
osx-64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py39h63b48b0_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
osx-arm64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py310hf8d0d8f_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
osx-arm64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py38h33210d7_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
osx-arm64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py39hb18efdd_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
win-64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py310he2412df_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
win-64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py37h179b583_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
win-64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py37hcc03f2d_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
win-64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py38h294d835_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]
win-64::markupsafe-2.1.0-py39hb82d6ee_0.tar.bz2
-  "version": "2.1.0"
+  "version": "2.1.0",
+  "constrains": [
+    "jinja2 >=3"
+  ]

I don't think the dropbox change has anything to do with my changes here.

@conda-forge-linter
Copy link

Hi! This is the friendly automated conda-forge-linting service.

I just wanted to let you know that I linted all conda-recipes in your PR (recipe) and found it was in an excellent condition.

@saraedum saraedum marked this pull request as ready for review June 16, 2022 16:17
@saraedum saraedum requested a review from a team as a code owner June 16, 2022 16:17
@ocefpaf
Copy link
Member

ocefpaf commented Jun 16, 2022

@saraedum we do have a build number 1 that has the correct constraint, right? Maybe let's just mark bn 0 as broken.

@xylar
Copy link
Contributor

xylar commented Jun 16, 2022

@ocefpaf, would it be better to fix the constraints than to mark build 0 as broken?

@ocefpaf
Copy link
Member

ocefpaf commented Jun 16, 2022

@ocefpaf, would it be better to fix the constraints than to mark build 0 as broken?

If markupsafe was a complex package or compiled extensions then fixing the constraints it better. But in this case it is virtually the same thing and I tend to go for the easiest solution.

@xylar
Copy link
Contributor

xylar commented Jun 16, 2022

If markupsafe was a complex package or compiled extensions then fixing the constraints it better. But in this case it is virtually the same thing and I tend to go for the easiest solution

I think it's a simple package. But I also think @saraedum is fixing the constraints rather than marking the build as broken. So I think that's good.

@xylar
Copy link
Contributor

xylar commented Jun 16, 2022

@saraedum we do have a build number 1 that has the correct constraint, right? Maybe let's just mark bn 0 as broken.

@ocefpaf, I think @saraedum's logic is fine. He's checking if the jinja2 is already in constraints and only fixing thing if it isn't. So that's skipping build 1 already, as his diff above shows. I think what's here now is fine.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

markupsafe 2.1.0 build 0 breaks jinja2<3
4 participants