Graphene: Version conflict `aniso8601`

Created on 12 Jun 2019  路  7Comments  路  Source: graphql-python/graphene

While built out my site with current latest graphene = 2.1.5 version, I got the following version conflict:

...
Got relativetimebuilder 2.0.0.
Version and requirements information containing aniso8601:
  Requirement of graphene: aniso8601<=6.0.*,>=3
  Requirement of aniso8601<=6.0.*,>=3: relativetimebuilder>=0.2.0
  Requirement of relativetimebuilder>=0.2.0: aniso8601<8.0.0,>=7.0.0
While:
  Updating test.
Error: There is a version conflict.
We already have: aniso8601 5.1.0
but relativetimebuilder 2.0.0 requires 'aniso8601<8.0.0,>=7.0.0'.

Seems like I got aniso8601 version 5.1.0 which still has the circular dependency issue.

Note:
For me pinning version to aniso8601 = 6.0.0 and relatvietimebuilder = 1.0.0 solved it. As you can see in the above traceback, relativetimebuilder already has version is 2.0.0, which requires aniso8601 >= 7.0.0, that is why both package had to be pinned.

Most helpful comment

v2.1.6 has been released to PyPi which fixes this issue: https://pypi.org/project/graphene/2.1.6/

Sorry for the inconvenience!

Release notes: https://github.com/graphql-python/graphene/releases/tag/v2.1.6

All 7 comments

You would still get a conflict even with that commit since relativetimebuilder is asking for >=7.0.0 and graphene wants <6. I've made https://github.com/graphql-python/graphene/pull/1009 to relax a bit that version.

Yes this is an internal conflict of 2.1.5 ... clean env produces this with pip install 'graphene==2.1.5'

v2.1.6 is ready to be released and it contains a fix for this: https://github.com/graphql-python/graphene/pull/1005

@eelkevdbos that commit actually fixes the error as described in the issue.

Pinning relativetimebuilder to a version < 2.0.0 resolved the issue for me. Since the issue is only because relativetimebuilder v2.0.0 requires aniso8610 >=7.0.0 but a version <=2.0.0 resolves fine with aniso8610 <=7.0.0, graphene's requirement of aniso8610 <=6.0.0 is satisfied.

@jkimbo sorry, I meant to say that, but reading it again I see it can be interpreted both ways (not a native speaker)

v2.1.6 has been released to PyPi which fixes this issue: https://pypi.org/project/graphene/2.1.6/

Sorry for the inconvenience!

Release notes: https://github.com/graphql-python/graphene/releases/tag/v2.1.6

Was this page helpful?
0 / 5 - 0 ratings