llamaIndex - ✅(Solved) Fix [Bug]: Publish Sub-Package to PyPi failed [3 pull requests, 7 comments, 2 participants]

Official PRs (…)
ON THIS PAGE

GitHub issue graph ai analysis

Paste a GitHub issue URL. We fetch that issue, discover linked issues from bodies/comments/timeline, collect linked pull requests, and produce a structured English report.

The report is written in English Markdown for sharing and archival.

Helpful · Quick feedback

Loading…
GitHub stats
run-llama/llama_index#20716Fetched 2026-04-08 00:31:17
View on GitHub
Comments
7
Participants
2
Timeline
21
Reactions
0
Timeline (top)
commented ×7mentioned ×4subscribed ×4cross-referenced ×3

Error Message

Using CPython 3.10.19 error: The requested interpreter resolved to Python 3.10.19, which is incompatible with the project's Python requirement: >=3.11, <4.0 (from project.requires-python) Error: Publishing llama-index-integrations/embeddings/llama-index-embeddings-ibm failed Publishing llama-index-integrations/llms/llama-index-llms-ibm … Using CPython 3.10.19 error: The requested interpreter resolved to Python 3.10.19, which is incompatible with the project's Python requirement: >=3.11, <3.14 (from project.requires-python) Error: Publishing llama-index-integrations/llms/llama-index-llms-ibm failed

Fix Action

Fixed

PR fix notes

PR #20714: chore: Remove persistent_connection parameter support, update

Description (problem / solution / changelog)

Description

Currently when we initialising WatsonxLLM and WatsonxEmbeddings we are getting below warning

UserWarning: The `persistent_connection` parameter is no longer supported and any value provided for this parameter will be ignored.

PR resolving this issue with removing usage of persistent_connection parameter

Additionally we would like te extend supported python versions with ">=3.11,<3.14"

New Package?

Did I fill in the tool.llamahub section in the pyproject.toml and provide a detailed README.md for my new integration or package?

  • Yes
  • No

Version Bump?

Did I bump the version in the pyproject.toml file of the package I am updating? (Except for the llama-index-core package)

  • Yes
  • No

Type of Change

Please delete options that are not relevant.

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • This change requires a documentation update

How Has This Been Tested?

Your pull-request will likely not be merged unless it is covered by some form of impactful unit testing.

  • I added new unit tests to cover this change
  • I believe this change is already covered by existing unit tests

Suggested Checklist:

  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • I have added Google Colab support for the newly added notebooks.
  • My changes generate no new warnings
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
  • I ran uv run make format; uv run make lint to appease the lint gods

Changed files

  • llama-index-integrations/embeddings/llama-index-embeddings-ibm/README.md (modified, +3/-3)
  • llama-index-integrations/embeddings/llama-index-embeddings-ibm/llama_index/embeddings/ibm/base.py (modified, +3/-12)
  • llama-index-integrations/embeddings/llama-index-embeddings-ibm/pyproject.toml (modified, +4/-4)
  • llama-index-integrations/embeddings/llama-index-embeddings-ibm/uv.lock (modified, +9/-377)
  • llama-index-integrations/llms/llama-index-llms-ibm/README.md (modified, +3/-3)
  • llama-index-integrations/llms/llama-index-llms-ibm/llama_index/llms/ibm/base.py (modified, +2/-11)
  • llama-index-integrations/llms/llama-index-llms-ibm/pyproject.toml (modified, +4/-4)
  • llama-index-integrations/llms/llama-index-llms-ibm/tests/test_ibm.py (modified, +15/-6)
  • llama-index-integrations/llms/llama-index-llms-ibm/uv.lock (modified, +459/-379)

PR #20717: fix: fix sub-package publishing action

Description (problem / solution / changelog)

Use python 3.12 to run sub-package publishing and avoid silent failures by exiting with a non-zero code if there have been one or more publishing failures

Closes #20716

Changed files

  • .github/workflows/publish_sub_package.yml (modified, +2/-1)

PR #20718: docs: Update IBM docs

Description (problem / solution / changelog)

Description

Update IBM docs

Fixes https://github.com/run-llama/llama_index/issues/20716#issuecomment-3914743820

New Package?

Did I fill in the tool.llamahub section in the pyproject.toml and provide a detailed README.md for my new integration or package?

  • Yes
  • No

Version Bump?

Did I bump the version in the pyproject.toml file of the package I am updating? (Except for the llama-index-core package)

  • Yes
  • No

Type of Change

Please delete options that are not relevant.

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • This change requires a documentation update

How Has This Been Tested?

Your pull-request will likely not be merged unless it is covered by some form of impactful unit testing.

  • I added new unit tests to cover this change
  • I believe this change is already covered by existing unit tests

Suggested Checklist:

  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • I have added Google Colab support for the newly added notebooks.
  • My changes generate no new warnings
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
  • I ran uv run make format; uv run make lint to appease the lint gods

Changed files

  • llama-index-integrations/embeddings/llama-index-embeddings-ibm/README.md (modified, +3/-3)
  • llama-index-integrations/embeddings/llama-index-embeddings-ibm/pyproject.toml (modified, +1/-1)
  • llama-index-integrations/llms/llama-index-llms-ibm/README.md (modified, +5/-5)
  • llama-index-integrations/llms/llama-index-llms-ibm/pyproject.toml (modified, +1/-1)

Code Example

Using CPython 3.10.19
error: The requested interpreter resolved to Python 3.10.19, which is incompatible with the project's Python requirement: `>=3.11, <4.0` (from `project.requires-python`)
Error: Publishing llama-index-integrations/embeddings/llama-index-embeddings-ibm failed
Publishing llama-index-integrations/llms/llama-index-llms-ibm …
Using CPython 3.10.19
error: The requested interpreter resolved to Python 3.10.19, which is incompatible with the project's Python requirement: `>=3.11, <3.14` (from `project.requires-python`)
Error: Publishing llama-index-integrations/llms/llama-index-llms-ibm failed

---
RAW_BUFFERClick to expand / collapse

Bug Description

I have noticed that Publish Sub-Package to PyPi action failed. Action link: https://github.com/run-llama/llama_index/actions/runs/22097914205/job/63859694233

Error message:

Using CPython 3.10.19
error: The requested interpreter resolved to Python 3.10.19, which is incompatible with the project's Python requirement: `>=3.11, <4.0` (from `project.requires-python`)
Error: Publishing llama-index-integrations/embeddings/llama-index-embeddings-ibm failed
Publishing llama-index-integrations/llms/llama-index-llms-ibm …
Using CPython 3.10.19
error: The requested interpreter resolved to Python 3.10.19, which is incompatible with the project's Python requirement: `>=3.11, <3.14` (from `project.requires-python`)
Error: Publishing llama-index-integrations/llms/llama-index-llms-ibm failed

Version

New version of llama-index-llms-ibm and llama-index-embeddings-ibm

Steps to Reproduce

Action link: https://github.com/run-llama/llama_index/actions/runs/22097914205/job/63859694233

Relevant Logs/Tracbacks

extent analysis

Fix Plan

Solution: Update Python Version Requirement

The issue is caused by a mismatch between the Python version used for publishing and the project's Python requirement. To fix this, we need to update the Python version requirement in the project's configuration.

Step-by-Step Solution

  1. Update project.requires-python: In your pyproject.toml or setup.py file, update the requires-python field to match the Python version used for publishing. For example:

[tool.poetry.dependencies] python = "^3.11"

   or
   ```python
from setuptools import setup

setup(
    # ...
    requires_python='>=3.11,<4.0',
    # ...
)
  1. Update pyupgrade configuration: If you're using pyupgrade to manage Python version compatibility, update the configuration to match the new Python version requirement. For example:

[tool.pyupgrade] target-version = "3.11"

3. **Re-run the `Publish Sub-Package to PyPi` action**:
   Re-run the action to publish the updated packages.

### Verification

1. **Check the action logs**:
   Verify that the action completes successfully and the packages are published correctly.
2. **Check the package versions**:
   Verify that the package versions match the expected versions.

### Extra Tips

* Make sure to update the Python version requirement in all relevant files, including `pyproject.toml`, `setup.py`, and `pyupgrade` configuration.
* If you're using a CI/CD pipeline, update the pipeline configuration to use the new Python version requirement.
* Consider using a tool like `pyupgrade` to manage Python version compatibility and ensure that your code is compatible with the target Python version.

Vote matrix · Quick signals

Works
Did the solution work? Tap to confirm.
Easy Fix
Was it a quick fix?
Time Saver
Did it save you time?
Blocking
Was it severely blocking?
Common Issue
Are others likely hitting this too?
Flaky / Intermittent
Is it intermittent?
Verified / Reproducible
Can you reproduce it reliably?
Loading…

Still need to ship something?

×6

Another batch ranked right after the header list — different links, same matching logic.

Back to top recommendations

TRENDING

llamaIndex - ✅(Solved) Fix [Bug]: Publish Sub-Package to PyPi failed [3 pull requests, 7 comments, 2 participants]