-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
[BUG] upgraded vendor copy of importlib_metadata breaks packages #4489
Comments
Thanks for the report. Yes, as part of the simplified vendoring process in Setuptools 71, the vendored packages were also updated, including the backward-incompatible behavior of importlib_metadata 8. It wasn't anticipated this change would have an effect on users, but it seems to have caught an issue unique to your environment where the relevant package does not have a Name metadata field. I have a decent understanding of what's going on and I'll take a look in earnest tomorrow. |
It looks like maybe abravalheri added that change in #3823. If I revert that change, the tests still pass, and I'm not very confident in what that code is aiming to accomplish. It looks like But wait! |
setuptools version
setuptools==71.0.0 setuptools==71.0.1 setuptools==71.0.2
Python version
3.9
OS
ubuntu 22.04 (linux)
Additional environment information
No response
Description
We have sdists that are not yet fully converted to pep517; however, they would build correctly with
pip wheel --use-pep517
. Unfortunately, importlib_metadata 8.0.0 landed this change (python/importlib_metadata#371) which converts a None return into a KeyError.Expected behavior
I expected an existing package to keep working.
How to Reproduce
This is with a specific internal package with code I can't share, but I can answer questions about it.
Output
It looks like the egg_info command had a workaround for the scenario this package is triggering (
setuptools/setuptools/command/egg_info.py
Line 258 in 17b735a
I assume this is at least partially related to this internal package, but I don't actually know what I'd need to change to fix it. I'm also not sure if this scenario is supposed to fail now, maybe there's some problem that we didn't notice with the old way?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: