Bug 1288812
Summary: | Build epel6 branch | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora EPEL | Reporter: | Nick <nick> |
Component: | python-parsedatetime | Assignee: | Michele Baldessari <michele> |
Status: | CLOSED DEFERRED | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | el6 | CC: | itamar, mcepl, michele, rbu |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2019-06-23 15:05:20 UTC | Type: | Bug |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 1288744 |
Description
Nick
2015-12-06 08:22:37 UTC
epel6 branch requested (In reply to Nick from comment #0) to speed up the process, I think we should put an updated srpm thats builds en epel6 , I will have time during holydays, if you're more fast than me, please do it. Ping. What is the state for this one? Upstream claims the package is only compatible with Python 2.7 or later. It seems the source is 2.6 compatible (syntax), but tests fail due to 2.6's unittest missing SkipTest. The tests are only skipped because PyICU is missing though. Unfortunately, the PyICU version in EL6 is not new enough for these tests. By the way, when adding PyICU to parsedatetime's rawhide spec as a build dependency, several test start failing as well. (In reply to Robert Buchholz from comment #4) > Upstream claims the package is only compatible with Python 2.7 or later. It > seems the source is 2.6 compatible (syntax), but tests fail due to 2.6's > unittest missing SkipTest. There is python-unittest2 which works for Python 2.6 and it is API compatible with 2.7. Should we close this one out or is anyone still working on this? Since none seems to be working on this I am going ahead and closing this for the time being. |