On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 at 11:46, Alan Pevec <ape...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Hi Pierre, > > > I submitted a patch to raise the minimum requirement for dateutil in > > cloudkitty: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/742477/ > > However, how are those requirements taken into consideration when > > packaging OpenStack in RDO? RDO packages for CentOS7 provide > > python2-dateutil-2.8.0-1.el7.noarch.rpm, but there is no such package > > in the CentOS8 repository. > > RDO sticks to the version from base OS if a package is available > there, as long as it works with upstream projects. > In EL7 base python-dateutil 1.5 was too old so it is overridden by an > updated version in the RDO repo. > When we moved to EL8, python3-dateutil 2.6 included in the base OS was > new enough so it was no introduced in RDO for EL8. > The whole process of maintaing RDO deps is documented at > https://www.rdoproject.org/documentation/requirements/ > > > Would it be better to just remove the use of tz.UTC? I believe we > > could use dateutil.tz.tzutc() instead. > > Yes backward compatibility would be good, if the upstream project is > happy with "available in RHEL8 base repo" justification. > > Cheers, > Alan
Hi Alan, Thank you for your answer. We're changing code to be compatible with older dateutil versions: https://review.opendev.org/#/c/747057/ However, did you notice that oslo.log also claims to require python-dateutil>=2.7.0? [1] It's not clear whether that's really needed: it used to require 2.5.3, but that was bumped in [2] to synchronize with lower-constraints, which itself must have been pulled from another dependency (but I don't know which one). [1] https://opendev.org/openstack/oslo.log/src/branch/master/requirements.txt#L13 [2] https://opendev.org/openstack/oslo.log/commit/d0cd199ce88e40c427c09f553a5d96d93ffa09e6 _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@lists.rdoproject.org http://lists.rdoproject.org/mailman/listinfo/dev To unsubscribe: dev-unsubscr...@lists.rdoproject.org
