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

Relax urllib3 upper bound #3122

Closed
NickCrews opened this issue Feb 14, 2024 · 3 comments
Closed

Relax urllib3 upper bound #3122

NickCrews opened this issue Feb 14, 2024 · 3 comments
Labels

Comments

@NickCrews
Copy link

Describe the bug

I am getting dependency conflicts due to the upper bound of urllib3<2.1 for python_version>="3.10". Unless we KNOW that botocore doesn't work with urllib3>=2.1, can we remove this restriction?

this dep constraint was most recently changed in #3034. I read through there and didn't see anything there about why the upper bound was included, but there might be a good reason.

Expected Behavior

I can co-install another package that requires urllib>=2.1

Current Behavior

I can't install that other package.

Reproduction Steps

NA

Possible Solution

No response

Additional Information/Context

No response

SDK version used

main

Environment details (OS name and version, etc.)

NA

@NickCrews NickCrews added bug This issue is a confirmed bug. needs-triage This issue or PR still needs to be triaged. labels Feb 14, 2024
@nateprewitt nateprewitt added question and removed bug This issue is a confirmed bug. needs-triage This issue or PR still needs to be triaged. labels Feb 14, 2024
@nateprewitt
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @NickCrews,

The reason we currently have the upperbound is due to urllib3's breaking changes in 2.1.0 as announced by urllib3 here. There are also other regressions in 2.2.0 that are breaking for botocore that are being tracked in urllib3/urllib3#3343.

For that reason, we can't move the pin without breaking the majority of botocore users without them taking manual steps to include the pin themselves.

@NickCrews
Copy link
Author

Wow, yeah that is a lot of unhappy people in #3111. This makes sense, thank you!

Copy link

This issue is now closed. Comments on closed issues are hard for our team to see.
If you need more assistance, please open a new issue that references this one.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants