As npm is the package manager for node, I frequently see it used with laravel boilerplate projects, but I can't reason why?
For example, this laravel-5-boilerplate instructs to npm install within the steps of installing the project..
Other examples too can be found of using npm with laravel..
Can someone please explain to me?
Nowadays npm containing general tools for work with various front-end tasks. So, it's very useful to grab some packages from it. In case of laravel, there is two utilities, that it uses:
gulp - streaming building tool for concatenating, minifing your css,js code.
laravel-elixir - is wrapper for gulp, written by Jeffrey Way, who is doing laracasts for us. It's place where you can found out more about this this tool in particular and in common.
If you will use only standart js/css, you can pass this step.
Blockquote
I made that boilerplate. That command is specific to download the
dependencies for the Laravel Elixir package
(http://laravel.com/docs/5.0/elixir) But has many, many uses outside
that.
The Elixir docs explain it very well.
Related
Background
I am new to the Laravel Package.
In my Laravel application I usually run the following command in order to install Bican Rokes, change the config files, etc...
php artisan make:auth
php artisan migrate
Objective
However, this process is tedious, so I was wondering if it is possible to create a package capable of automatizing the process.
What I tried
To achieve this I read the Laravel documentation, which teaches how to create packages, but I was unable to understand if this is possible and if it yes, how it should be done.
Questions
Can a package be used to automate this behaviour?
If yes, can you provide it?
If not, can you explain to me what a package really is? (links to tutorials are welcome)
If I cannot use a package, is there any other way of doing this?
I am not pushing the sale of anything, nor do I know this guy. But this tutorial is a pretty good starting point for laravel.
Laravel Tutorial Series
if a separate package should be created or not will depend on volume of work you want to accomplish. a starting point can be a custom console command, and from with-in that command, you can call multiple other commands.. And from their you can extend it to do other things like editing files etc. If you don't know how to write a console command in Laravel, here is the link to docs: https://laravel.com/docs/5.2/artisan#writing-commands
I'm building an SDK for developers to use to build modules for ecommerce platforms that will consume our API for a new startup.
Obviously it would be ideal to use composer, which I am doing right now. But as I examine most of the ecommerce platforms out there right now, or at least the most popular ones, they don't use composer.
So I'm wondering what's the best way to get all the dependencies all my current packages need and build them into a freestanding SDK.
This way I can have a version that will work for both composer and non-composer enabled platforms.
Is there a standardized way to do this in terms of a design pattern? How would I lay out all the dependency packages in any organized way?
Because those e-commerce platforms don't use composer, that doesn't force you to exclude composer from equation. You can't distribute your package as a plugin/module/whatever for that particular e-commerce platform, but you can still use composer's autoloader in production.
You could prepare the package for deployment on your machine or on a build server, archive the result and distribute the archive.
For the sake of simplicity, my example will assume that you will prepare your package on your local machine:
Create a temporary working directory:
$ mkdir -p ~/.tmp && cd ~/.tmp
Clone your package:
$ git clone <package>
Install dependencies1
$ cd ~/.tmp/<package> && composer.phar install --no-dev --optimize-autoloader
or if you do this from an automated tool:
$ cd ~/.tmp/<package> && composer.phar install --no-ansi --no-dev --no-interaction --no-progress --no-scripts --optimize-autoloader
Remove .git directory.
Create the zip/tar archive from ~/.tmp/<package>
Distribute the archive.
Assuming that your package is already a plugin/module for that e-commerce platform, it can be installed as usual from that zip/tar archive.
1) Regarding --optimize-autoloader, please read this answer from Sven, which explains why in some cases doesn't help your application to become faster.
Don't have dependencies!
Yes, seriously. If you'd develop an API client that would use Guzzle as the HTTP client, you'd have to make a choice: Use Guzzle version 3, 4, 5 or 6?
Guzzle 3 is out of maintenance and abandoned. You wouldn't want to use it.
Guzzle 4 is also considered end-of-life, because version 5 came very fast. Nobody really use this version.
This boils down to using either version 5 or 6. But Guzzle is using the same namespace and likely the same class names in both versions, but is incompatible to each other. No matter which version you choose: Your customer will have made the opposite choice - and now you have a codebase where two versions of Guzzle are running at the same time - this will not work.
If you don't have dependencies, but deliver everything within your own codebase, you have all of your code under your control, and are reducing the need to use Composer as a tool to easily install all your dependencies. Your package will have everything already included, it's unlikely that there will be any namespace conflicts.
You'd be able to offer a ZIP file for download. And if you additionally offer a composer.json to allow developers to include your package that way, everyone will be happy.
Update
Now after finding out that everyone thinks I am crazy proposing not to use stuff invented elsewhere, I challenge you to think about the situation once again: You find that you have to produce code that will likely be included in a codebase that is NOT managed with Composer. That means you have no idea what kind of software is put together there.
It may simply be so that you have a version of Guzzle in the existing codebase - undetectable, because there is no composer.json. Now you provide your own package with a bundled Guzzle version (whatever way made it appear there). This will likely crash the entire software at some point because of conflicts, because the autoloading will of course be merged at some point, and then some part of the code will request some Guzzle class to be loaded, which is included twice from two different versions of Guzzle.
WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN IN THIS CASE? THINGS WILL CRASH!
And it is unavoidable that this will happen. Even in the lucky case of being able to use Composer, it will conflict - the software won't crash, but the entire package won't be installed. The good thing is: You will notice this immediately.
If the primary goal is to deliver an API client anyone can use in every situation, without using a dependency manager: Don't have dependencies!
Alternatively, be completely sure that you know which software is already being used, and create a package that will not conflict in any case. However, this is still an effort, because there might be other addons also being installed, which might include conflicting software.
My central point is: If you don't have a dependency manager like Composer being able to manage the dependencies, you are better off NOT to have dependencies in your own code to make it super easy to include your own code in someone else code base.
And the question above clearly states that Composer is not an option in the general case.
Now there is one light at the end of the tunnel: When it comes to general tasks, the PHP-FIG has started to standardize interfaces that should leverage interoperability. For HTTP, the standard is PSR-7.
You COULD provide an API SDK that depends (and brings with it) the PSR-7 interface and requires the user of the SDK to provide a HTTP client that implements this interface.
The problem with this approach I see is that you will still run into trouble if you try to use for example Guzzle for the same reason: The only valid choice now is to use Guzzle 6 for the SDK - what if Guzzle 5 was already used elsewhere? Conflict! The good thing is: You can avoid using Guzzle 6 if you are already using Guzzle 5 by using any other PSR-7 capable HTTP client.
I wonder if someone can help me. I've been handed in a Cake PHP app that I need to 1) add minor changes 2) deploy. I've never really worked with Cake before and was wondering whether do I need to anything in order for it to work?
For instance, With a Node app, you need to install modules npm install. With a Rails app you'll likely need to install the gems bundle install.
Is there something similar with Cake? I've set the localhost server, but when I try to access the url I get all sort of errors. Some I've fixed (missing environment settings which I just override the Redis host and port). The latest one is:
{
"exception":{
"class":"MissingControllerException",
"code":404,
"message":"Controller class Controller could not be found.",
"file":"\/Library\/WebServer\/Documents\/php\/oompbe\/vendors\/cakephp\/lib\/Cake\/Routing\/Dispatcher.php",
"line":154,
"trace":[
"#0 \.../app\/webroot\/index.php(109): Dispatcher->dispatch(Object(CakeRequest), Object(CakeResponse))",
"#1 {main}"
]
}
}
PS: What's up with all the crazy \/\/?
PPS: Can I find out the version Cake I'm running?
CakePHP is just php. As most properly done php apps these days it comes with composer. I recommend you to read at least the basics of it's manual. Composer is an awesome tool.
git clone <repo>
cd <reponame>
composer install
If you start a new Cake application the official documentation tells you how to this as well:
composer create-project --prefer-dist cakephp/app [app_name]
If you want to automate things further composer provides you callback scripts. They'll allow you to automate tasks, basically trigger commands, after different actions. This is pretty useful to build assets after a composer update for example. I recommend you to not put lots of commands into that section but instead have dedicated script files you trigger by the callbacks.
Can I find out the version Cake I'm running?
If installed via composer it is usually in vendor/cakephp/cakephp/version.txt. Check the content of that file.
I am working on a PHP application that uses many features from PEAR. The app is meant to be distributable kind of like Wordpress but really scaled down.
Now the problem I've run into is that PEAR needs to be installed and configured alongside the PHP server without which my app simply will not function unless the users go through all the painful steps of installing PEAR on their server. Users can very well be newbies or non-technical so it's not an option for them.
Therefore there is a need to somehow package everything PEAR into the application itself. As far as I know it may not be possible.
Are there any alternate solution to this? Any solution at all will help. Thanks..
PEAR installs system wide dependencies which makes things like what you describe hard. Composer on the other hand is exactly what you'd need, because it's a per-project dependency manager with much better support for resolving and installing of dependencies. Basically, compared to Composer, PEAR sucks... it always did, Composer on the other hand rocks!
The first thing I would do for each package you need is to see if it is also provided on https://packagist.org/. If it is, problem solved, include the installation into your build process with composer. If you end up with only a few packages from PEAR, you have several options:
inspire the author to provide it on packagist
make your own mirror on packagist (not recommended but sometimes necessary)
see if the project is on github and install directly from git with composer
install the PEAR package via composer anyways, it's possible.
Short answer: switch to composer!
If you are talking about the PEAR packages or class files, you can put the PEAR packages anywhere you want. Just put the ones you use into a dir within your app dir structure and add that to the include path.
We created a ZF2 project with skeleton app and it works fine for a simple test application. Now we are working on a real project. My question is what we should store in the repository (SVN), the whole project structure or just the new source code? ZF2 comes with a vendor directory which is almost 31MB in size (which has the ZF libraries). Should we store the whole vendor folder in SVN?
This is the first time we are using PHP and ZF so are not clear in how we will deliver the complete project to production from SVN. Also what is the build process if at all exists. Any clues/links to "ZF2 project packaging" is appreciated.
No, don't include dependencies in your repository! Putting your dependencies under version control doesn't do any good, it just blows up your repo for no reason.
You want to add the skeleton to your repository and your own library but definitely not the framework or any other dependencies.
The way to go is to use composer for dependency installation and some kind of build tool like Phing to automate installation of your project.
See the relevant chapter on phptherightway for more information on how to build your application.
The most simple build process doesn't even need a build tool
checkout your project from SVN/git
run php composer.phar install to install the needed dependencies (defined in your composer.json)
But most probably you want to do some more stuff like setup up the environment, deleting some files, etc.
A word about ZF packages. They're not available from packagist but you can install them with composer anyways. You just have to add the dedicated repository to your composer.json as described here: http://framework.zend.com/downloads/composer