I'm making a custom application using Laravel. By default Laravel generates a composer.json file like the following:
{
"name": "laravel/laravel",
"description": "The Laravel Framework.",
"keywords": ["framework", "laravel"],
"license": "MIT",
}
Is it good practice to change the name, description, license etc on my project?
More info: I am developing this project for another company. They will use it internally (as a public website) and may or may not hire a different developer in the future.
To be honest, changing it provides no real benefit unless you're planning to release the project as a composer projects that allows people to run composer create-project you/yourproject.
There's no real rule around changing if you plan to keep it internal only, but there are two arguments, one for and one against.
Changing it keeps it simple, and gives developers working on your project a nice little source to some basic information.
Keeping it as the default allows you and other developers to access some basic information about the systems creation.
So ultimately, it's entirely up to you.
Yes, you should edit it to reflect the current state. At least delete info that you don't want, like the MIT license (you probably don't want to license proprietary code that way), the keywords, description and name.
Maybe in the future, composer create-project will deal with it more properly (the source project needs to have a name to be identifiable, but creating a project almost never needs to keep that name) - but this also won't help you with existing projects.
Keep that meta data correct (at least delete incorrect data) - you never know the benefits. Personally, I hugely like having the right project names because that name gets displayed on my Satis pages as "projects using this package", i.e. the reverse dependency - so I know what to update if I change a library.
Related
I'm trying to learn more about package development by using Laravel Nova as a bit of a guide. I'm confused as to how Nova's assets are compiled, and part of that confusion stems from Nova not having a webpack.mix.js but instead a webpack.mix.js.dist.
I'm trying to model this within my package in order to compile and publish my assets for use in my project, but I get npm errors when trying to run any command
Cannot find module 'dir/dir/dir/package/webpack.mix'
I'm unsure as to why it is looking for this file in the first place, but it still seems to be an issue. To get to the root of why this is an issue and how I can fix this, I'd like to know what the difference between webpack.mix.js and webpack.mix.js.dist is.
Any feedback on this would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Files that end in '.dist' are generally the default distribution files that come from the package and should not be edited. They will be overwritten on package updates.
You can use them as a reference to add or replace configuration in your primary file(s).
From what I can gather, Laravel Nova creates it's real webpack.mix.js from this file when you activate a certain feature. (It's a paid product, I do not have a license to see it, I can only skim the documents.)
A couple of years of go i used to program using PHP, but without frameworks. With these recent developments I've decided to get in the to the game and try using one. I've decided to use yii 2.0 .
I've read some of the documentation and in my opinion there is some lack of information (at least for who is getting started), so i´m having some problems installing yii 2.0 on my computer using Xampp. The PHP version is 5.5.9.
From what i could understand i downloaded the yii 2.0 framework, extracted the content and copied to c:\xampp\htdocs\yii2
I've already installed the composer, so the the next thing to do i think would be, using the cmd, do these two lines of code:
composer global require "fxp/composer-asset-plugin:1.0.0"
composer create-project --prefer-dist --stability=dev yiisoft/yii2-app-basic basic
The problem is when i do the last one it asks for username and password i think of GitHub. Can you tell me if I'm obligated to have an account on github to install yii 2.0 framework.
Is there a way to get around this?
Yii2 is integrated with composer asset plugin. It allows download Bower and NodeJs packages through Composer.
Github account is required to overcome API rate limit. Here is the explanation from the main contributor of this extension:
It's a rate limit of Github API. In anonymous access, Github at a
greatly reduced limit (60/hr it seems to me), and we must be logged
with a token for have a much higher limit.
See composer/composer#1569 and composer/composer#1877
The problem also exists using Nodejs and Bower.
You can find it in this issue, it's 9th from the top.
I think workaround with installing Bower and the same packages is not an option, because initially and with each framework update you must manually synchronize packages with their versions and override some configuration. Also some extensions require javascript plugins and using composer asset plugin too. So you have to do the same with each of them too. It simply not worth it. And having account on Github for web developer nowadays is kind of de facto standard.
Just create Github account if you are still don't have one and everything should be fine. Earlier updating process was pretty slow, now it's faster and I found this approach pretty interesting and flexible.
I'm developing a site for my company and I also need to modify the native component "mailto" to fit our needs.
I'm working with a joomla 2.5
I was wondering if future updates occur, what will happen to the lines I've added, for example, in "\components\com_mailto\controller.php"...
I haven't find answers on the net.
Also, for the same reason, I've modified the default layout of an article. Should I rename it? and if yes, how, because I couldn't do it (when I've tried the article did not display).
Thanks for your help
Before starting to edit core Joomla components, should should always have a look at the options you have. I don't believe in editing core file as it simply causes problems for updates when released, therefore in my opinion, you have 2 options:
I always make a note of all my requirements and start looking for a 3rd party extension that caters for my requirements.
If I cannot find a 3rd party extension and don't particularly want to start digging into it's code, I would go with developing a plugin. Plugins are used to manipulate the behavior or something and therefore come in extremely handy for when you would require core editing.
Editing the layout of an extension view is completely fine, but it's strongly recommended you make a Template Override so that if the extension does ever get updated, your changes won't get overridden.
So to answer you initial question, any line you have added to the controller.php file will get overridden when you decide to update the extension.
Hope this helps
While the answer from Lodder is totally valid, as a last resource you can also consider forking the com_mailto as a separate component.
This has some disadvantages:
you need to rename all the files involved (controllers, models, views)
you need to maintain it and keep in in sync with future updates (consider than you are now on 2.5.x and in a year you might want to upgrade to 3.x).
I know that if I want to suggest some library in my composer, I can do this.
"suggest": {
"vendor/library": "A description"
},
But, is there a way to suggest for require or for require-dev? Could I simply add a comment for this?
The description in the suggest line can be used for anything you want the developer to see, including suggestions on whether to require the package for development.
On the other hand, the differences between require and require-dev are few. Both get installed by default. You'd only interfere if you don't want to install that 100 MB "development only" package that will never ever get used in your production code and wastes precious space on the server.
Let me elaborate on the question...
I have a custom CMS (built on codeigniter FTW) that includes many different types of modules.
Every time we have a new project come through the door, it is a variation and amalgamation of a few of the existing modules.
Sometimes a project comes through with requirements that are not satisfied by the existing modules, in that case I will write a new module...
All the modules are separated out in folders and the code is VC-ed using GIT. Every module has it's own Model, View, Controller, SQL and Javascript files. All the dependencies are also separated and folder-ed nicely...
The next step for me is to create some sort of installer script that will take me through the "scaffolding" process step by step, allowing me to choose from the existing modules. A glorified "makefile" if you may...
Rather than rolling my own, does anyone know of any such thing out in the wild.
I know of Apache ANT (java), what I need is something in pure PHP with very low or no dependencies...
I would like something as simple as running a git pull and then php make.php
Thanks.
The "Ant-like" alternative I am aware of in PHP land is phing it is written in PHP and it will allow you to perform several tasks for packaging, deploying and testing your web applications. The documentation is a great starting point if you want to hit the ground running.
It is can also be extended to define new tasks if needed (examples and explanations are provided in the documentation)
Reading through the doco it appears to be possible to install Phing without PEAR as documented here you would have to correctly setup the environment on each machine you wish to use Phing on. I can not confirm this method though as I use PEAR for all my installs.