We'd like to use composer on http://intense.wmflabs.org for all extensions where possible; ConfirmAccount has none. Unless Aaron wants to/can create one under his name, it would be nice for the package to be under the "official" https://packagist.org/users/mediawiki/ , given this is among the ten or so most used extensions out there.
Description
Details
Related Objects
- Mentioned In
- rECAC9426ce6740f1: Convert to globals and add composer support
rMEXTcce92e8a4a9b: Updated mediawiki/extensions Project: mediawiki/extensions/ConfirmAccount…
rMEXT32314f237aeb: Updated mediawiki/extensions Project: mediawiki/extensions/ConfirmAccount…
rECACcb0b339a21d3: Convert to globals and add composer support
T86472: InTense: write documentation for new users - Mentioned Here
- T467: RfC: Extension management with Composer
Event Timeline
Change 185205 had a related patch set uploaded (by Paladox):
Convert to globals and add composer support
@Jdforrester-WMF said:
Composer support is pretty valueless here. This isn't a library for MediaWiki core, it's an extension.
Can you clarify what you mean here? I fail to see how being "a library for MediaWiki core" is relevant for anything. If you know better than the page https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Composer/For_extensions , please share your knowledge by updating the wiki page.
Change 185205 restored by Paladox:
Convert to globals and add composer support
Reason:
No reason for abandoning it.
Comments in Gerrit say
Composer support is pretty valueless here. This isn't a library for MediaWiki core, it's an extension.
and
Have you read https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Composer.json_best_practices ?
That's both needs to be replied to and that has not happened yet.
..and once someone assigns this task to her/himself, feel free to slightly increase priority.
I'll do this myself, if nobody does. As task description says, I'm giving Aaron some time to confirm he doesn't prefer to publish a package himself.
Should this use the merged extension registration RFC method (extension.json) instead (or in addition, though that seems somewhat duplicative?)
Should this use the merged extension registration RFC method (extension.json) instead (or in addition, though that seems somewhat duplicative?)
How is that related? The page you linked doesn't mention packagist. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Composer/For_extensions#Developer_resources doesn't mention extension.json.
Change 190027 had a related patch set uploaded (by Paladox):
Revert "Revert "Convert to globals and add composer support""
This was discussed on the Gerrit, but for anyone who didn't see that:
extension.json is not an alternative way to use Composer.
It is (the beginning) of another way to register, manage, and install extensions. See the accepted RFC, https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Extension_registration .
I have tested it now and works please visit https://packagist.org/packages/mediawiki/confirmaccount
Reverted by @Legoktm https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/225663/
I don't understand who is "we". Why would people be prevented from using gerrit extensions in the way most useful to them? Do we really want to encourage forking and mirroring elsewhere?
Change 225680 had a related patch set uploaded (by Paladox):
Revert "Revert "Convert to globals and add composer support""
@Legoktm what was the point in adding composer.json support a year before in mediawiki 1.22 only to stop using it in mediawiki 1.25+.
Change 225680 abandoned by Umherirrender:
Convert to globals and add composer support
Reason:
per T467