Olivier Berger wrote: > Hi. > > FYI, a new version of NuSOAP has been released upstream, that seems to > fix bugs and incompatibilities (deprecation warnings at least) with PHP > 5.3. > > I've prepared a Debian package for this new version (currently in source > form at > http://mentors.debian.net/cgi-bin/maintainer-packages?action=details;package=nusoap > ) > > I'm not sure how well it has been tested though, and if it could break > applications depending on it.
Hi, First of all, thanks a lot for taking the time to do this packaging work. It's much appreciated here. I also spotted issues in the old nusoap, and I'm happy that the upstream author took time to transition to something that works with php 5.3. ereg() calls and the like had to be replaced... I'd be happy to test your package, but the above link is accessible only by yourself, with your login. Please send me the link to your .dsc file. > May I ask you to try and test if it breaks your packages eventually > (and/or ask your upstreams in case they would have not noticed) ? I'm > pretty sure SOAP is not the most easily testable features in many apps > though, but who knows ;) One of the contributors to our software reported some php "Notice". I'll ask him if this new version fixes it. As my package is used in other distributions that do not have a libnusoap package, the source package of DTC (but NOT the Debian binaries) include nusoap.php. So it will be easy for us to try, and I believe that this will be valid even if he runs FreeBSD. I just wonder if the new version has changed from a standalone single "nusoap.php" file or, as much as I can see, if a project should now use also the class.*.php files that are next to it, or if they are just the examples (without seaching much, I'd guess it didn't change, and a single nusoap.php is enough, and that others are just examples, right?). > I'm waiting for 0.7.3-3 to transition to testing before uploading to > unstable anyway, but any help testing it would be much welcome. > I'm thinking about uploading to experimental maybe. Having the package in experimental doesn't mater much to me, as long as we all know where to get the package to test with before it goes in SID or Testing. What's important give us something to test with (eg: a working URL) and to add entries to #577441 saying that: - there's a new version from upstream - the new version of your package is under testing period - where to get the updated package until testing period is done Currently, your entry just says that the upstream dropped maintenance, which is not right anymore, since you are packaging 0.9.5. To save time to everyone, I am CCing the bug, so you wont need more work! Please just send the correct (updated) package URL as a link to #577441 as well, and we can start testing the new version. Thanks again for your packaging work, Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
