[wp-trac] [WordPress Trac] #23912: Add Composer package description

[WordPress Trac]

#23912: Add Composer package description
------------------------------------+------------------
 Reporter:  Rarst                   |       Owner:
     Type:  enhancement             |      Status:  new
 Priority:  normal                  |   Milestone:  3.7
Component:  General                 |     Version:  3.5
 Severity:  trivial                 |  Resolution:
 Keywords:  has-patch dev-feedback  |
------------------------------------+------------------

Comment (by nacin):

 Rather than
 `tools/installer/tags/0.1.0/src/WordPress/Composer/Installer.php` can we
 just do `tools/composer/WordPress/Composer/Installer.php`? (Optionally
 `src` in there if required?) Given that our own trunk will be branched and
 tagged, I'd rather not manage internal branches and tags for this.

 Or, if this is its own self-standing thing, is it worth managing this at
 github.com/wordpress/composer-installer (or wordpress/composer?) instead?

 > Also, for software built to work with as many server configurations as
 possible, there isn't really anything useful that we can put in 'suggest'.
 For now, we can probably leave it out.
 I would tend to disagree, actually. There are a number of things we can
 "suggest". Cursory examination produces ext-gd, ext-imagick, ext-curl (as
 you said), ext-json (maybe omit given current upstream licensing mess),
 ext-exif, ext-openssl, ext-iconv, ext-libxml, ext-hash, ext-mbstring, ext-
 simplexml, ext-zlib. Also, ext-mysql is missing from require.

 The desires for robust functionality aside, I would not mind showing off
 to everyone "Hey look, we ''use'' all of these obvious things, but since
 PHP is, you know, we still work ''without'' them — beat that." It's an
 interesting case study in portability.

--
Ticket URL: <http://core.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/23912#comment:30>
WordPress Trac <http://core.trac.wordpress.org/>
WordPress blogging software