Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Symfony Process 2.4 dependency #85

Closed
veewee opened this issue May 19, 2015 · 6 comments
Closed

Symfony Process 2.4 dependency #85

veewee opened this issue May 19, 2015 · 6 comments

Comments

@veewee
Copy link

veewee commented May 19, 2015

In composer.json the Symfony Process components require version 2.4 or above, but a lot of projects use Symfony 2.3 because it is an LTS release. Is it possible to downgrade component versions to ^2.3?

@lyrixx
Copy link
Member

lyrixx commented May 20, 2015

But you can have both symfony/symfony in 2.3.* and symfony/process in 2.4.* at the same time, right ?

=> I just tested, and yes, it's possible.

@veewee
Copy link
Author

veewee commented May 20, 2015

It is indeed possible to require both with composer:

{
    "require": {
        "symfony/symfony": "2.3",
        "symfony/process": "2.4"
    }
}

But the autoloader will only use on of both. When you run --optimize-autoloader with the install command, you will see that the process component will be pointed to 2.4, which might result in errors in the application.

@GrahamCampbell
Copy link
Member

"2.3" would be bad, as that would get 2.3.0.0, when you really want 2.3.x.

@veewee
Copy link
Author

veewee commented May 20, 2015

The sample above was to test symfony/symfony 2.3 with symfony/process 2.4.
The actual dependency for the solution would be ^2.3 which would require >=2.3.0 <2.4

@lyrixx
Copy link
Member

lyrixx commented May 20, 2015

Anyway, I agree with the initial issue. If we can use "~2.3,~3.0" it could be much better

@GrahamCampbell
Copy link
Member

What's the verdict here?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants