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

Python 3.4 processing of content results in CRITICAL: unorderable types: Article() < Article() #483

Closed
salvor7 opened this issue Jan 28, 2017 · 4 comments · Fixed by #506

Comments

@salvor7
Copy link

salvor7 commented Jan 28, 2017

It doesn't look like this issue made it over here from the pelican repo.
getpelican/pelican#1591

I just experience this error with zurb-F5-basic myself.

Sorry if this was raised under another name that I'm not seeing for what it is. My searches of the repo and closed tickets didn't turn up anything like it.

@joshmorel
Copy link
Contributor

joshmorel commented Apr 16, 2017

Hi salvor7,

Seems like this "just worked" with Python 2 but with Python 3 is throwing an error. A simple fix, but this affecting other themes and I would like to fix all at the same time - I could do this perhaps tomorrow but would need the PR to be accepted, etc.

In the interim, if you want this to work, in zurb-f5-basic/tags.html change:
{% for article in articles|sort %}
to
{% for article in articles %}

Also, I've tested both ways working in Python 2 but not Python 3. But I
would like to confirm, did you just upgrade to using Python 3?

Thanks,
Josh

@salvor7
Copy link
Author

salvor7 commented Apr 19, 2017 via email

@joshmorel
Copy link
Contributor

Hi Andrew, I put in a PR - which should fix it #506

So was this theme working before for you or did you just start trying it? Maybe it was a combination of Python 3 and the latest Pelican breaking that piece of code? Either way, once the PR is merged it will work with both Python 2 and 3.

FYI - I had edited out that part of my comment because I thought it was extraneous - but since you've replied to it I added it back in.

@salvor7
Copy link
Author

salvor7 commented Apr 19, 2017 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants