Pin the Python protobuf dependency (#71)

[jamespfennell]

The Python protobuf library was updated tonight in a backwards incompatible way, and the Python bindings are no longer working for fresh builds. I tried to upgrade the bindings but couldn't get the tests to pass. As a workaround, this commit just pins the version of the Python protobuf package to something less than 4.

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[atvaccaro]

Hey, has there been any discussion of this issue/PR? We've hit the same problem since poetry will gladly update protobuf since it's not pinned in this repo.

[jameslinjl]

@atvaccaro i'm not aware of any further discussion here, but i think this PR makes sense to merge + publish as a stopgap (cc @isabelle-dr). i have this on my radar to dig further into, but won't get to it right away

[isabelle-dr]

Sounds good @jameslinjl. Just one thing:

publish as a stopgap

What does it mean? 🙈

[jamespfennell]

A longer term solution is to upgrade the Python dependencies to their most recent version, however I tried this and the unit tests don’t pass so it’s more work than this PR. This PR is a “stopgap” in the sense that it just deals with the problem in the short term until someone gets around to upgrading the dependencies.

[jameslinjl]

@jamespfennell @atvaccaro I'm actually having some trouble reproducing this issue (caveat: I'm not super familiar with the Python ecosystem, so I could totally be doing something wrong here). I needed to resolve an issue on the unit test where rb was necessary when calling open (since the .pb file is binary data), but otherwise the tests continue to pass, even when I do a clean install with protobuf-4.21.10. Is there some sort of step that I'm missing here?

[jamespfennell]

@jameslinjl if you got the tests to pass with the most recent protobuf release that would be awesome! I think it would be preferable to the current PR.

[tannert]

Any update on this? I just naively installed gtfs-realtime-bindings using pip and got an unusable package.

[jameslinjl]

Hey @tannert ! master should have the required fixes for this already, but I don't believe the latest changes have been published yet. I believe @bdferris-v2 already granted @isabelle-dr the permission to be able to publish the new package version, so I think we just need for her to give that a shot!

[jameslinjl]

hey @tannert and @jamespfennell ! i just published the python bindings 1.0.0, and it seems to be working for me when I test it on my local machine pulling from PyPI. Would one (or both) of you be able to help validate from your side to make sure 1.0.0 looks good?

[tannert]

@jameslinjl just tested 1.0.0 and it looks good! Thanks!

[jameslinjl]

@isabelle-dr could you close this PR since it is no longer relevant / needed?