q: relationship with pear-core-minimal?

[gggeek]

Should this package replace pear-core-minimal or implement some api specified by it?

[ashnazg]

Minimal is a tiny subset of the core package, for when another package has a dependency on the smallest pieces from core.

[gggeek]

@ashnazg thanks. Let me explain better my question.

It stems from finding a package (pear_ole) which does not declare a dependency on either pear-core or pear-core-minimal. And, since it does make use of some of the classes found in pear-core-minimal, when installing it in a project via Composer, it throws an error (see nick322/secure-spreadsheet#24)

I wanted to know
A. if it is correct / standard practice for that package to state a dependency on pear-core-minimal, and
B. if the pear-core package includes the same classes which are in pear-core-minimal

If B is true, then I think that this package should have "replace": "pear-core-minimal" in its composer.json, as:

• it would avoid scenarios where both pear-core-minimal and pear-core get installed
• it would allow users to install pear-core and have their project working fine, when one of their dependencies requires pear-core-minimal

[gggeek]

I think that this project should also declare "replace": "pear_exception" - as that Composer package is a single class which is also included here