Skip to content

Conversation

@gitpushdashf
Copy link

Fixes: #2902

Signed-off-by: John Doe <john@doe.null>
setup.py Outdated
extras_require = {
# win32 APIs if on Windows (required for npipe support)
':sys_platform == "win32"': 'pywin32==227',
':sys_platform == "win32"': 'pywin32>=227',

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
':sys_platform == "win32"': 'pywin32>=227',
':sys_platform == "win32"': 'pywin32>=301',

maybe? to avoid GHSA-hwfp-hg2m-9vr2

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sure. I just updated that.

Signed-off-by: John Doe <john@doe.null>
@yaleman
Copy link

yaleman commented Feb 8, 2022

Could this please be merged? 🙏🏻

@ShutdownRepo
Copy link

Awesome! Impatiently waiting for the merge 😄

@Nicoretti Nicoretti mentioned this pull request Feb 24, 2022
@gitpushdashf
Copy link
Author

@StefanScherer would it be possible for you to review this or a related MR? This dependency issue is a potential security vulnerability for some, and a false positive for others. We could really use a Docker 5.0.2 release with these changes.

@jgiannuzzi
Copy link
Contributor

@ulyssessouza @aiordache @StefanScherer could you please review this PR? 🙏

This dependency issue is causing a lot of trouble for Windows users. It's a potential security vulnerability, but also prevents installing docker-py on Python 3.10, as support for it was introduced in pywin32 302.

@gitpushdashf
Copy link
Author

Unfortunately, it sounds like Docker won't be addressing this and we may be forced to fork.

#2989

@thrau
Copy link

thrau commented Jul 21, 2022

I understand docker has different priorities, but this is completely blocking the use of docker-py on Windows with Python 3.10, which FWIW, LocalStack is relying on.

@milas
Copy link
Contributor

milas commented Jul 26, 2022

Hi! Thanks so much for your PR and apologies for the delay in review. A fix for this has been merged and we're planning to issue a new release containing it soon. For context, changes similar to yours were done in #3004 to address some CI changes in the repo, which blocked merging of your PR as-is, and given the delay on this, we wanted to be respectful of our contributor's time and not require you to rebase + re-review.

@milas milas closed this Jul 26, 2022
@gitpushdashf
Copy link
Author

Thank you!

@thrau
Copy link

thrau commented Jul 26, 2022

thank you @milas!! 🙏

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

9 participants