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

requests-2.18.4 requires urllib3<1.23.0 #366

Open
madstacks opened this issue Jun 19, 2018 · 4 comments
Open

requests-2.18.4 requires urllib3<1.23.0 #366

madstacks opened this issue Jun 19, 2018 · 4 comments

Comments

@madstacks
Copy link

I just installed will in a fresh python3.4 virtualenv and it looks like the changes in 2.1.3 (cfea0f5) are pulling in urllib3==1.23 which is not compatible with requests==2.18.4.

$ generate_will_project
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/opt/venvs/will/lib/python3.4/site-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 570, in _build_master
    ws.require(__requires__)
  File "/opt/venvs/will/lib/python3.4/site-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 888, in require
    needed = self.resolve(parse_requirements(requirements))
  File "/opt/venvs/will/lib/python3.4/site-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 779, in resolve
    raise VersionConflict(dist, req).with_context(dependent_req)
pkg_resources.ContextualVersionConflict: (urllib3 1.23 (/opt/venvs/will/lib/python3.4/site-packages), Requirement.parse('urllib3<1.23,>=1.21.1'), {'requests'})

In requests 2.19.x they are allowing urllib3<1.24
psf/requests@ac944b7#diff-2eeaed663bd0d25b7e608891384b7298

Do you recommend to upgrade requests to 2.19.x or downgrade urllib3 to 1.22?

@skoczen
Copy link
Owner

skoczen commented Jun 20, 2018

Hey @madstacks , that's super annoying. Here, I get a warning, but things work fine. Honestly, either path should be fine, but with SSL-type stuff, I tend to say newer is better. Go with requests 2.19.x.

Thanks for the report! I'll update the requirements freeze in the next release.

@madstacks
Copy link
Author

Thanks @skoczen. Also is there any reason to lock in on pyasn1==0.1.7? I am running into a conflict with the ldap3 package which requires pyasn1>=0.1.8.

@skoczen
Copy link
Owner

skoczen commented Jun 22, 2018

@madstacks nope, upgrading it's great. If you don't mind, would you submit a PR with the requirements that all end up meshing for you? Would be great to have a second set of eyes!

@madstacks
Copy link
Author

I submitted a PR here #367

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants