> Sounds good. Next time you do a release, don’t forget to update the VCS > fields. > > https://salsa.debian.org/ruby-team/ruby-mdl/-/blob/debian/latest/debian/ > control?ref_type=heads#L13-14 > > (I probably wouldn’t bother doing a release just for this change, as the old > link should redirect.)
This is because moving to the new name space followed the new admission to testing. Yet I see this issue and would -- if deemed useful by the elders -- go for the extra mile (i.e., a new 0.17.0-3 to testing) as it - were in line with the Debian policy - though links on `git` and `browse` on the package tracker page eventually resolve to the new name space, the previously used addressed would no longer appear while hoovering the mouse over the links - such 0.17.0-3 on testing probably is more favourable for a new backport to `stable` I want to provide again > By the way, why are you transitioning the package name from ruby-mdl to > markdownlint? In Debian, it makes it easy to find packages published on > RubyGems if their Debian package name is ruby-<RubyGems name>. Daniel Leidert once suggested a split into `ruby-mdl` for the library, and `markdownlinter` (not `markdownlint`) for the application on the other.[1] Meanwhile, the popcon[2] records about four times as many installations on `markdownlint` than `ruby-mdl`. One may argue the name `markdownlint` lowers the bar to potentially interested but less familiar to Ruby, easier to find (for instance on https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=markdown) though the total of the numbers is low. On the other hand, `ruby-mdl` highlights "implemented in Ruby" while the maintainers on GitHub are aware of `markdownlint`, `markdownlint-cli`, and `markdownlint-cli2` -- all implemented in Node.js, with overlap of scope, and developers. On occasion, a bug issue filed to (Ruby) `markdownlint` indeed is is about one the ones in Node.js. Right now both `markdownlint` and `ruby-mdl` lead to `mdl` to the CLI and right now I'm not sure if the active removal of either one (by reorganization of d/control) were preferable now (potential 0.17.0-3), or 2028 (after forky's release as `stable`). Best regards, Norwid [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-ruby/2023/01/msg00033.html [2] https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=ruby-mdl
