-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3k
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
Certain passwords fail with Extra-index-url with password in pip.conf #6961
Comments
Hello. The problem likely isn't with Please see here for details. Essentially, your username should be encoded as |
Sorry, there may have been some copy paste errors - im not sure where the Pro is coming from. the : is seperating the username from the password as in the url is :
I reset my password to both with and without the ^ on that end (not sure if it breaks if the ^ is in the middle of the password). Is it now that username/passwords now need to be url encoded where before they didn't? (I note that ^ isn't on the list of reserved characters in URL's, but its also not on the reserved list either) |
The recent change in the issue you linked is that You can try encoding with |
So adding I'm happy to close this one, but I wonder if the documentation could be updated - that said I couldn't find any documentations specifically about this - the |
Environment
Description
When I have a ^ in my password (which was auto generated), then Pip throws an error when trying to look at the private pypi. This has started to happen on 'newer versions of pip' (unclear which version broke it).
curl https://jt:Pro:REDACT^@REDACT/simple/cryptography/
gives back the redirect to the right place ok.My pip.conf looks like this:
Expected behavior
Not an error but the intended package should be installed from the correct server.
How to Reproduce
Output
Also in this instance, the password is then printed in the error, which is handy (there was a previous feature which auto-redacts it from the 'looking in indexes' output.
I wonder if this is related to #6775 ?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: