[dev] Composer was: Constructive Criticism/Venting

[Jan Schneider]

Zitat von Michael M Slusarz <slusarz at horde.org>:

> Quoting Mathieu Parent <math.parent at gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> 2014-03-12 8:07 GMT+01:00 Michael M Slusarz <slusarz at horde.org>:
>>> Quoting Ralf Lang <lang at b1-systems.de>:
>>>
>>>> On the pirum thing: This is going to be interesting for packagers. Does
>>>> this mean that pear (in any form) is obsolete? This would mean
>>>> distributions have to re-tool and rebase their rpm/debs on composer files.
>>>
>>>
>>> My take on the situation is that, for all intents and purposes, PEAR is
>>> dead.  At least going forward.  It exists to install legacy/existing
>>> software.  But no new projects/code is going to use it.  (I've had some
>>> patches accepted into PEAR months ago but there appears to be little/no
>>> motiviation to release a new version.)
>>
>> Please don't remove PEAR packages and channel. We use them to make the
>> debian packages.
>>
>>> Although, that being said, composer lacks a mean to install libraries
>>> globally (at least I'm not aware of one).  Which tools like npm and ruby
>>> gems allow.  So it's not a drop-in replacement for PEAR either.
>>
>> What is missing in composer:
>> - clean way to install system-wide
>> - related: a clean policy to avoid name clashes
>> - minor: long description in composer.json (it only has short desc)
>> - PECL support (i.e. you will still need PEAR for horde_lz4)
>>
>> We also need to adapt our tools, which may take some time.
>
> For the record ... I never said that we should abandon PEAR.  I  
> don't see any reason to.  We already have an established release and  
> installation process using PEAR and there's no reason to switch away  
> from this just to cater to the new flavor of the month.
>
> I am instead saying that we need to adapt our release process and/or  
> repository architecture to better handle integration with composer  
> as an alternative to PEAR.
>
> Packagist is becoming the new pear.php.net - and would be a  
> fantastic platform for us to distribute the modular libraries we  
> have that are way better than anything else out there.  But  
> packagist has very strict requirements as to repo architecture, as  
> opposed to creating PEAR packages, so we unfortunately need to find  
> a way to accomodate the former since the latter can be worked around  
> from our end.

+1
-- 
Jan Schneider
The Horde Project
http://www.horde.org/
https://www.facebook.com/hordeproject