Line 97: | Line 97: | ||
== Feedback == | == Feedback == | ||
<!-- Summarize the feedback from the community and address why you chose not to accept proposed alternatives. This section is optional for all change proposals but is strongly suggested. Incorporating feedback here as it is raised gives FESCo a clearer view of your proposal and leaves a good record for the future. If you get no feedback, that is useful to note in this section as well. For innovative or possibly controversial ideas, consider collecting feedback before you file the change proposal. --> | <!-- Summarize the feedback from the community and address why you chose not to accept proposed alternatives. This section is optional for all change proposals but is strongly suggested. Incorporating feedback here as it is raised gives FESCo a clearer view of your proposal and leaves a good record for the future. If you get no feedback, that is useful to note in this section as well. For innovative or possibly controversial ideas, consider collecting feedback before you file the change proposal. --> | ||
We are aware that we missed the Change proposal submission deadline, originally we planned to ship this as a regular package update. While doing an impact check we identified ~20 affected packages and we decided to write this Change proposal for better transparency. We believe there is enough time to complete this Change in time for the Completion deadline. We are prepared to postpone this Change to Fedora 39 if FESCo decides so. | |||
== Benefit to Fedora == | == Benefit to Fedora == |
Revision as of 15:41, 24 January 2023
Packaging 22+
Summary
Update to a new upstream release of python-packaging contains a breaking change. Since version 22+ upstream removed support for LegacySpecifier and LegacyVersion some packages will break. This is a breaking change and projects are encouraged to use versions adherent to PEP 440.
Owner
- Name: Tomáš Hrnčiar
- Email: thrnciar@redhat.com
- Name: Miro Hrončok
- Email: mhroncok@redhat.com
Current status
- Targeted release: Fedora Linux 38
- Last updated: 2023-01-24
- FESCo issue: <will be assigned by the Wrangler>
- Tracker bug: <will be assigned by the Wrangler>
- Release notes tracker: <will be assigned by the Wrangler>
Detailed Description
>>> # before 22.0 >>> packaging.version.parse("This is a completely random string") <LegacyVersion('This is a completely random string')>
>>> # after 22.0 >>> packaging.version.parse("This is a completely random string") Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module> File "[...]/.venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/packaging/version.py", line 52, in parse return Version(version) File "[...]/.venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/packaging/version.py", line 197, in __init__ raise InvalidVersion(f"Invalid version: '{version}'") packaging.version.InvalidVersion: Invalid version: 'This is a completely random string'
This "feature" has been deprecated for nearly two years now.
PyPI has not permitted uploading packages with invalid versions for even more years. The latest versions of pip should be rejecting/erroring out on wheels with such versions as well. The stricter metadata validation helps pip's dependency resolver's logic, along with helping the broader ecology avoid needing to deal with outside-of-standard tooling/behaviours.
Possible failures caused by upgraded python-packaging:
- pinned version of python-packaging
- tests containing unsupported versions need to be adjusted
- copr-backend - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2162436
- some packages provide incompatible versions and python-rpm-generators are unable to parse them. See PRs links below for inspiration on how to fix them.
- obs-service-set_version
- pcs
- pyodbc
- python-btchip
- python-dipy
- python-dropbox
- python-haversion - https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-haversion/pull-request/1
- python-httplib2
- python-lacrosse - https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-lacrosse/pull-request/1
- python-pdir2
- python-pvc
- python-pytest-httpx
- unknown
- python-google-cloud-bigquery - package does not build in rawhide
Feedback
We are aware that we missed the Change proposal submission deadline, originally we planned to ship this as a regular package update. While doing an impact check we identified ~20 affected packages and we decided to write this Change proposal for better transparency. We believe there is enough time to complete this Change in time for the Completion deadline. We are prepared to postpone this Change to Fedora 39 if FESCo decides so.
Benefit to Fedora
Packaging 22+ contains a handwritten parser for parsing requirements and markers. Thanks to this, packaging has dropped a runtime dependency on pyparsing and from now on is not depending on any package on runtime. This will simplify bootstrapping of the next Python.
Scope
- Proposal owners: update python-packaging to 23.x.x, provide help
- Other developers: report problems to the upstream and backport patch to the affected packages. The impact can be tested using COPR repository where Packaging 23+ has been built.
- Release engineering: #Releng issue number
- Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)
- Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
- Alignment with Objectives:
Upgrade/compatibility impact
How To Test
- Find the package you want to fix in this COPR repository and check the build logs to determine the failure cause.
- Patch package so Provides() provides correct version.
- When patching the package, you can test it using the same copr repository where the latest version of python-packaging has been built.
User Experience
Regular distro users shouldn't notice any change in python-packaging behaviour, except for packages that use LegacyVersion
or LegacySpecifier
. Such packages will fail with packaging.version.InvalidVersion: Invalid version: 'This is a completely random string'
and should be fixed by their maintainers.
Dependencies
Contingency Plan
- Contingency mechanism: (What to do? Who will do it?) N/A (not a System Wide Change)
- Contingency deadline: N/A (not a System Wide Change)
- Blocks release? N/A (not a System Wide Change), Yes/No
Documentation
N/A (not a System Wide Change)