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
Upgrade to Symfony 5.3 #1217
Upgrade to Symfony 5.3 #1217
Conversation
I just force-pushed on your fork @javiereguiluz. This is now rebased and has more fixes for 5.3. I didn't touch the assets, but it would be good to align them with Symfony UX also. |
The ErrorException in the CI output might be a bug in symfony/validator rather than in the demo |
I added a commit to update assets.
|
Yes, unmet peer dependencies are usually fine (either the package is present but in a different version that still works and that's okay, or it's not present but it's optional for the usage of the application). That's how peerDeps are mostly used in JS (not a fan either). |
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ | |||
"license": "MIT", | |||
"type": "project", | |||
"description": "Symfony Demo Application", | |||
"minimum-stability": "stable", | |||
"minimum-stability": "dev", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
should be stable
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
note that we also have "prefer-stable": true
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
but the 5.4 skeleton is meaningful about using dev stability as 5.4 is still in dev. Here, we talk about updating to 5.3 which is stable.
And prefer-stable
might still select dev versions of other packages depending on the order of package selection (see composer/composer#9917)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yep sorry bad link, we use dev since 5.2:
https://github.com/symfony/skeleton/blob/5.2/composer.json#L6
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
but is it an intended choice, or just forgetting to update the skeleton once the stable release happen ? I never remember discussing using that behavior for stable skeletons (I might have missed the discussion of course)
PR is green, ready for merge! |
Fantastic work 👏 Thanks Nicolas and all reviewers! 🚀 |
For now, it's Symfony 5.3 RC1, but we'll keep updating this branch until 5.3 stable.
Things that I found while upgrading:
Missing UPGRADE guide entry?
In the UPGRADE guide (https://github.com/symfony/symfony/blob/5.3/UPGRADE-5.3.md) we don't even mention
enable_csrf
, but this change is needed inconfig/packages/security.yaml
:Replace this:
by this:
Unexpected failures
The upgrade guide mentions this:
But we have these test failures:
Unexpected direct deprecations
I see the following "direct deprecation" notices, but I don't know how they can be "direct deprecations". We don't use any of these in our code:
Indirect deprecations to fix?
There are still these "indirect deprecations". Are we missing some dependency updates ... or are these really deprecations pending to be fixed?