Re: RFS swiftmailer new upstream release

Hi IOhannes,

On 2014-05-08 14:37, Nicolas wrote:
>> so why did you change dh compat-level from 8 to 9 then?
>>
>>
> I don't know exactly. There's no change that affect my package and
> the others packages I work on used compat level 9

that's a rather lame reason.
if there is no change that affects your package, you should probably
go for compat-level 8, to ease backporting.
read: don't use overly tight (that is: more strict than needed)
dependencies

You're perfectly right. My fault.

>
> Ok I understand. Do you think I should make a revert and add
> severals commits for that release or should I do it for next ones
> ?

the latter.

Ok.

thanks.
looking at the mentors-page, it becomes quite obvious that by now
there is a newer upstream version (5.2.0) available.
you might want to package the newest version. (i'm aware that your
initial request for sponsorship predates swift-5.1.0; but then was
then and now is now :-))

Yes I saw. :-( And of course I want to package that new release but no archive (zip or tar.gz) are provided. The upstream team intentionnaly do that " We do not provide downloadable versions of Swiftmailer as of Swiftmailer 5.2.0." They want developer to use composer instead.

also: it's somewhat useless to mention "tell lintian to not complain"
in your lintian-override
also the override description might be a bit more to the point: what
the script is used for, is not so interesting; what i find more
interesting is why do you think it should stay non-executable? (the
fact that upstream distributes it like this and that (afaict) it is
only used on an ad-hoc basis may be enough)

PS: i don't want to raise too many expectations; as i'm not into php
(packaging), it's unlikely that *i* will sponsor your package; in any
case, i hope that my comments will help bringing the package into a
state that a potential sponsor will find more useful.

All your comments are usefull. Thanks. I will update my package with your advice in mind.

Regards,

Nicolas