Removed minimum-stability: beta suggestion

[bdunogier]

Suggesting minimum-stability: beta sounds like a bad practice, as it will affect all of the other packages. 1.0@beta should be safer, and do the same thing.

[webmozart]

Thanks for the suggestion @bdunogier! The problem here is that several other required are in beta as well and can't be loaded without requiring them in beta explicitly or setting the minimum-stability. Did the above work for you?

[bdunogier]

Hi !

As discussed during the summer camp, I understand the limitation. I'd maybe mention that setting minimum-stability is one approach, but that it may have serious consequences. And maybe detail the alternative.

What do you think ?

[webmozart]

Hm I understand your point. We can choose between:

1. Documenting the easiest way of installation ("minimum-stability": "beta") so that people can easily test Puli
2. Documenting the safest way of installation (explicit packages with "@beta" suffix) so that Puli can safely be used in production projects

At the moment, I tend to choosing 1 since people testing Puli seems more important to me right now than ensuring that it works safely in production environment. After all, the beta isn't supposed to be used in production. What do you think?

[bdunogier]

the beta isn't supposed to be used in production

Well... ;-)
But you're right. I have pushed a different version, what do you think ?

[webmozart]

uppercase Puli, also in the next paragraph

[webmozart]

Looks good! :) The block about "minimum-stability" exists multiple times in the project, could you replace this everywhere? You could also extract the block to a partial template and include it everywhere.

[skolodyazhnyy]

We are using minimum-stability: beta together with prefer-stable: true. It works great.

[webmozart]

@skolodyazhnyy That's a very good input!

@bdunogier Could you adapt the PR?