Don't require yanked version of lxml #297
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
In that case i prefer @bzvestey a new python3-saml release should be done including the 2 PRs recently approved and the change with lxml<4.7.1 @akx I believe the bug was introduced by |
|
@eriktalvi FYI |
|
@eriktalvi any ETA for solving this? It is impacting some customers. |
|
Going with @pitbulk's suggestion. There was an issue with 4.7.1 that I don't want to reintroduce without fixing. |
|
This have been release as part of version 1.14.0 |
|
@pitbulk Hello, why lxml/lxml#332 introduced the bug? IIUC, the final result of this pr is just to add a few tests. Anything I missed? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Version 4.7.0 of lxml was yanked from pypi because it was missing some required data.
Version 4.7.1 replaces it; changing the specifier from
==to~=allows any 4.7.x series lxml.EDIT: I just saw #292 / a55cc9a ... has this been reported upstream to lxml?