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

semantic_version version requirement too strong #360

Closed
olebole opened this issue Oct 24, 2017 · 5 comments · Fixed by #361
Closed

semantic_version version requirement too strong #360

olebole opened this issue Oct 24, 2017 · 5 comments · Fixed by #361
Milestone

Comments

@olebole
Copy link
Contributor

olebole commented Oct 24, 2017

The version of the "semantic_version" package is given as 2.6.0, which seems to be unnecessarily strong: There seems to be nothing in the ChangeLog of semantic_version.
For the Debian build, we cannot just download newer versions of a package, and the semantic_version version in Debian is still 2.3.1. Building asdf with that version works however fine.

Could you consider reducing the version requirement for semantic_version?

@drdavella
Copy link
Contributor

After a quick test run, it looks like 2.3.1 should be sufficient. I'll have to put together a new release, though. Just curious but what is the restriction in Debian that prevents you from downloading newer versions of the package?

@olebole
Copy link
Contributor Author

olebole commented Oct 24, 2017

Probably nothing; the maintainer just didn't update. I can ask him, but when it works with 2.3.1, I can immediately upload the new asdf version.

@drdavella drdavella added this to the 1.3.1 milestone Oct 24, 2017
@drdavella
Copy link
Contributor

Okay. I'm not sure how urgent this is so I'm not sure whether I should issue a 1.3.1 bugfix release today since I just released 1.3.0.

@olebole
Copy link
Contributor Author

olebole commented Oct 24, 2017

It is not urgent at all -- I already have a patch which I can apply in the meantime. It was just nice to have your confirmation.

@drdavella
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for the heads up. This was the first version of asdf to have this requirement, and I just assumed it was fine to go with the latest stable version. I wasn't aware that not all systems had access to it.

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