Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [Error: The version in the Python package metadata 0.0.0 normalizes to zero.
It's likely a packaging error caused by missing version information
(e.g. when using a version control system snapshot as a source).
Try providing the version information manually when building the Python package,
for example by setting the SETUPTOOLS_SCM_PRETEND_VERSION environment variable if the package uses setuptools_scm.
If you are confident that the version of the Python package is intentionally zero,
you may %define the _python_dist_allow_version_zero macro in the spec file to disable this check.

error: Dependency tokens must begin with alpha-numeric, '_' or '/': *** PYTHON_PROVIDED_VERSION_NORMALIZES_TO_ZERO___SEE_STDERR ***]: [This snippet explains that package metadata version is normalized to zero. This is undesired, since package has a non-zero actual version (0.5.6-1.fc43). There is likely a definition error in the package.]

Issue: The build failed because RPM macros contain a fail-safe, if they detect that the virtual provides would contain a version 0.0.0. This is considered an error in most of the cases and RPM doesn't allow to create package containing invalid version metadata.
Resolution: If  the package uses setuptools_scm, setting the SETUPTOOLS_SCM_PRETEND_VERSION environment variable should solve the issue. If it doesn't use setuptools_scm, the package code should be reviewed and fixed, as it is likely a programming error.