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

No python_requires defined #1327

Closed
2 tasks done
vytas7 opened this issue Jan 16, 2022 · 4 comments · Fixed by #1328
Closed
2 tasks done

No python_requires defined #1327

vytas7 opened this issue Jan 16, 2022 · 4 comments · Fixed by #1328

Comments

@vytas7
Copy link
Contributor

vytas7 commented Jan 16, 2022

Checklist

  • The bug is reproducible against the latest release or master.
  • There are no similar issues or pull requests to fix it yet.

Describe the bug

It seems that no python_requires is defined for the uvicorn package, which in turn results in the latest version being installed in a Python 3.6 (CI) environment (that subsequently fails).

If python_requires were defined to restrict the package to supported versions of the interpreter, I would have got an older version (that supported py36) instead.

Steps to reproduce the bug

In a py36 environment

pip install uvicorn
# Run uvicorn
# ...

Expected behavior

An older version is installed that works.

Actual behavior

uvicorn errors out, says py36 is unsupported.

Debugging material

No response

Environment

CPython 3.6

Additional context

No response

@Kludex
Copy link
Member

Kludex commented Jan 16, 2022

PR welcome to add python_requires.

@vytas7
Copy link
Contributor Author

vytas7 commented Jan 16, 2022

Thanks @Kludex, I'll try to open one later today!
(Although it's obviously too late for the 3.6 case unless you are willing to yank the current version later.)

@Kludex
Copy link
Member

Kludex commented Jan 16, 2022

I don't have the power to yank the current version. We should ask @tomchristie for that, but I'm not sure if it's that necessary.

The recommendation on zero version is to pin the package version.

In any case, that line of code will be useful in the future.

@vytas7
Copy link
Contributor Author

vytas7 commented Jan 16, 2022

@Kludex I've now opened a PR: #1328.

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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants