https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1356587 --- Comment #4 from Shawn Iwinski <shawn@xxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Remi Collet from comment #3) > Everything looks ok (from packaging PoV), no Blockers > > > Only one clarification: > > IIUC, _autoload.php is designed for compatibility with non-namespaced > version 1 of the library. > > So application using this library probably don't need it. > > Instead of including _autoload.php (without NS) from autoload.php (SAML2 NS) > shouldn't it be better to do the opposite ? > > application using v1 will include _autoload.php, thus will get a working > autoloader without NS (and SAML2 NS required by class alias). > > application using v2 will include autoload.php, this will get a working > autoloader "only" for SAML2 NS. > > What do you think ? I don't like that `_autoload.php` states "Temporary autoloader". I do not want to be responsible for making sure that file is correct and v1 compatibility always works if just packaging v2. I would much rather have the two separate pkgs and just keep them updated to upstream's separate releases. If you look at upstream releases [1], 1.9 was released after 2.2. Even though right now v2 might be suitable as a drop-in replacement for v1, I'd rather not be responsible for that. [1] https://github.com/simplesamlphp/saml2/releases -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx