Closed markrogoyski closed 7 years ago
Hi Mark,
Can you provide more detail about what you're working on? TeleSign encourages you to use the latest SDKs as they're all up to date. Without much info, some things I can think of that might address your situation:
-Erikka
Hi Erikka,
Thank you for the response. We have some legacy code we are working with that was manually including the v1.0.0 code. We want to use Composer in our workflow to handle our 3rd-party libraries, but Telesign v1.0.0 is unable to be installed using Composer.
Updating to the latest version sounds like a prudent thing to do, but as a first step we'd like to get the existing code to work via Composer before changing versions.
Would it be possible to draft a release for the existing v1.0.0 tag and refresh Packagist so the version becomes available to Composer?
Thanks.
I sent a note asking the team about this - we are heading into the weekend so I will check again with them on Monday.
Hi Mark,
You can "inline package definition" in your legacy project's composer.json, like this, https://gist.github.com/luka-zitnik/735e5b3b001cd6dafbe2684559011faf
This is not an official statement from TeleSign, but only my own remark.
Hi Luka,
We are currently doing it that way, with a custom repository definition. But, it seems like a hack a bit.
Hopefully TeleSign can publish the existing v1.0.0 git tag as a release?
Hi Kristopher,
I have the patch in a fork, but still don't have the approval.
Thanks!
Should have used classpath instead of files. Let me know if that's an issue to you.
Hi, classmap would be a little nicer, but I think the performance impact of using "files" won't be noticed.
Thanks,
I'll leave it then. Thank you.
Can you draft an official release for tag v1.0.0? It does not show up on Packagist as a valid release and therefore it can't be installed via Composer. If you try to require v1.0.0 and install with Composer, you will get the following error:
The requested package telesign/telesign v1.0.0 exists as telesign/telesign[dev-master, v2.0.0, v2.1.0] but these are rejected by your constraint.
Thanks.