Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

"day is out of range for month" (leap day) #2564

Closed
jsha opened this issue Feb 29, 2016 · 4 comments
Closed

"day is out of range for month" (leap day) #2564

jsha opened this issue Feb 29, 2016 · 4 comments

Comments

@jsha
Copy link
Contributor

@jsha jsha commented Feb 29, 2016

In a Travis job run at 2016-02-29T03:47:20Z, I got a failure with this message:

Attempting to renew cert from /tmp/leitrssL/conf/renewal/le.wtf.conf produced an unexpected error: day is out of range for month. Skipping.

I suspect that there is an error in the day-parsing code that doesn't understand leap days (Feb 29). Note that this will make all our integration test runs fail for most of the day tomorrow.

@schoen
Copy link
Contributor

@schoen schoen commented Feb 29, 2016

Filed upstream bug at bear/parsedatetime#155.

Loading

@schoen
Copy link
Contributor

@schoen schoen commented Feb 29, 2016

Apparently it may already have been fixed upstream, but not in the version available on PyPi.

Loading

@bmw bmw mentioned this issue Feb 29, 2016
@bmw
Copy link
Member

@bmw bmw commented Feb 29, 2016

While pip prefers the latest available version, letsencrypt-auto pins specific versions of our dependencies for increased stability. While unlikely to be a problem for our users, I created #2567 to make sure we pin a version of parsedatetime that fixes the problem in le-auto.

Loading

@bmw
Copy link
Member

@bmw bmw commented Feb 29, 2016

fixed in #2566

Loading

@bmw bmw closed this Feb 29, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
3 participants