Hi David, thanks for your reply, see my comment inlined below.
On Sun, 15 May 2016 11:39:53 -0400 David Prévot <taf...@debian.org> wrote: > Control: tag -1 upstream > > On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 01:29:46PM +0200, Antonio Ospite wrote: > > Package: php-symfony-serializer > > Version: 2.8.6+dfsg-1 > > Severity: normal > > > > Dear Maintainer, > > > > I installed php-symfony-serializer and tried the first example from the > > documentation at > > http://symfony.com/doc/current/components/serializer.html, the code is > > like this: > […] > > PHP Fatal error: Uncaught Error: Class > > 'Symfony\Component\PropertyAccess\PropertyAccess' not found in > > /usr/share/php/Symfony/Component/Serializer/Normalizer/ObjectNormalizer.php:40 > > The documentation page you’re referring to already warns about it: > > “To use the ObjectNormalizer, the PropertyAccess component must also be > installed.” > > > Of course the error goes away if I install the > > php-symfony-property-access package. > > > > I see that php-symfony-property-access is a suggested package, but I was > > wondering it if should be a dependency or a least a recommended > > package. > > This is intended upstream, that only suggests symfony/property-info in > their composer.json file. > > https://github.com/symfony/symfony/blob/master/src/Symfony/Component/Serializer/composer.json > I do see property-access in the file above, maybe the "only" from your sentence above refers to the "suggests" part and you meant to write symfony/property-access instead of symfony/property-info? > Composer documents suggest as follow: > > Suggested packages that can enhance or work well with this package. These are > just informational and are displayed after the package is installed, to give > your users a hint that they could add more packages, even though they are not > strictly required. > > https://getcomposer.org/doc/04-schema.md#suggest > > Debian documents suggests as follow: > > This is used to declare that one package may be more useful with one or > more others. Using this field tells the packaging system and the user > that the listed packages are related to this one and can perhaps enhance > its usefulness, but that installing this one without them is perfectly > reasonable. > > https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#s-binarydeps > > Both Composer and Debian interpretation of suggest seem to match well > enough, so if you believe the relation is too weak, you should try to > convince upstream about it. > > http://symfony.com/doc/current/contributing/code/bugs.html > http://symfony.com/doc/current/contributing/code/patches.html > I can give that a try, thanks for the suggestion. My rationale is that a Serializer() object requires a normalizer, and that the ObjectNormalizer is most likely the one that new user will use, so adding property-access (which ObjectNormalizer requires) as a dependency is more a matter of convenience that a strict requirement for the Serializer class. I'll see what upstream thinks about that. The whole idea started from the fact that I have a Debian package[1] which depends on php-symfony-serializer, and the upstream code uses ObjectNormalizer, so as for now my Debian package should also depend on php-symfony-property-access explicitly to make sure it works everywhere, which looked to me as an "indirect" dependency. Thanks, Antonio [1] https://packages.debian.org/sid/tweeper -- Antonio Ospite http://ao2.it A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?