Setuptools version 78.0.1 breaks install of many packages
1–10 of 14 posts
Re: Setuptools version 78.0.1 breaks install of many packages
#2[deleted]
Re: Setuptools version 78.0.1 breaks install of many packages
#3The original report is just for ansible-vault, but comments indicate widespread effects, hence the altered title here.
Re: Setuptools version 78.0.1 breaks install of many packages
#4Probably 78.0.0 as well which was released yesterday. The diff between 78.0.0 and 78.0.1 appears to be no-op from user perspective https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/compare/v78.0.0...v78.0.1
Re: Setuptools version 78.0.1 breaks install of many packages
#5Crazy amount of breakage...
Here is a PR which reverts this: https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/pull/4911
Interesting that maintainers of setuptools still only postpone the depreciation date for a year, so we can probably expect more issues like this in the future.
Re: Setuptools version 78.0.1 breaks install of many packages
#6From what I gather this has basically derailed CI for the morning for the majority of places out there. Only workaround is pinning build-time dependencies, which only pip and uv seem to let you do well. Poetry is SOL / heavily cache-dependent as to whether it works.
Re: Setuptools version 78.0.1 breaks install of many packages
#7The current approach of the maintainers terrifies me -- de facto standards should be respected. Even if something is invalid like `description-file`, if it is present in 12k repos it should raise a warning and not break anything.
In the rationale for this that I can find [1], a maintainer says the following:
> I'm inclined to say we should do it, even though it will cause some disruption.
They also say an alternative is to "accept the status quo", which is exactily what they should be doing. I can't find maintainers giving a compelling reason not to support this status quo of `long-description` as an alias to `long_description` besides "simplifying code." Code simplification should never take precedence over massive breakage of compatibility.
[1] https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/pull/4870#pullrequestrevi...
Re: Setuptools version 78.0.1 breaks install of many packages
#8They yanked the relevant change and pushed a new one with a revert, this is now resolved
Took them seemingly forever to do. The reversion, sure, that might take a bit to proof, but the yank should have been done way sooner
Re: Setuptools version 78.0.1 breaks install of many packages
#9They yanked the relevant change and pushed a new one with a revert, this is now resolved Took them seemingly forever to do. The reversion, sure, that might take a bit to proof, but the yank should have been done way sooner
78.0.1 doesn't look yanked to me https://pypi.org/project/setuptools/78.0.1/
afaict they just released 78.0.2 with a revert of the offending bits
Re: Setuptools version 78.0.1 breaks install of many packages
#10The current approach of the maintainers terrifies me -- de facto standards should be respected. Even if something is invalid like `description-file`, if it is present in 12k repos it should raise a warning and not break anything. In the rationale for this that I can find [1], a maintainer says the following: > I'm inclined to say we should do it, even though it will cause some disruption. They also say an alternative…
I'm usually of the opinion of just removing stuff when it needs to be gone, but this is really an incosequential change to the setuptools code compared to how many problems it caused