143

I'm trying to use composer to automatically clone a git repository from github that isn't in packagist but it's not working and I can't figure out what am I doing wrong.

I think I have to include it among "repositories" like so:

"repositories": [
    {
        "url": "https://github.com/l3pp4rd/DoctrineExtensions.git",
        "type": "git"
    }
],

and then probably list it in "require" section. It should be similar to this example but it doesn't work. It just gives this error:

Your requirements could not be resolved to an installable set of packages.

Have anyone tried to do something like this already?

9 Answers 9

163

That package in fact is available through packagist. You don't need a custom repository definition in this case. Just make sure you add a require (which is always needed) with a matching version constraint.

In general, if a package is available on packagist, do not add a VCS repo. It will just slow things down.


For packages that are not available via packagist, use a VCS (or git) repository, as shown in your question. When you do, make sure that:

  • The "repositories" field is specified in the root composer.json (it's a root-only field, repository definitions from required packages are ignored)
  • The repositories definition points to a valid VCS repo
  • If the type is "git" instead of "vcs" (as in your question), make sure it is in fact a git repo
  • You have a require for the package in question
  • The constraint in the require matches the versions provided by the VCS repo. You can use composer show <packagename> to find the available versions. In this case ~2.3 would be a good option.
  • The name in the require matches the name in the remote composer.json. In this case, it is gedmo/doctrine-extensions.

Here is a sample composer.json that installs the same package via a VCS repo:

{
    "repositories": [
        {
            "url": "https://github.com/l3pp4rd/DoctrineExtensions.git",
            "type": "git"
        }
    ],
    "require": {
        "gedmo/doctrine-extensions": "~2.3"
    }
}

The VCS repo docs explain all of this quite well.


If there is a git (or other VCS) repository with a composer.json available, do not use a "package" repo. Package repos require you to provide all of the metadata in the definition and will completely ignore any composer.json present in the provided dist and source. They also have additional limitations, such as not allowing for proper updates in most cases.

Avoid package repos (see also the docs).

Since composer looks for a version tag/release and the use case is often that of using a personal fork of an existing package make sure to add one, since forking doesn't copy tags and without one you won't be able to install it with an obscure composer error.

11
  • 1
    Ouu, thanks! I didn't find it because I thought it'll be called after the git repo DoctrineExtensions.
    – martin
    Commented Oct 19, 2012 at 9:48
  • 3
    Always look at the name given in composer.json.
    – igorw
    Commented Oct 19, 2012 at 10:32
  • 17
    -1 Why is this marked as the correct answer? It sure did solve the OP's problem but Clarence and Mike Graf gave answers to the more general problem behind it. It's highly unlikely that anybody searching for a way to include non-packagist projects would want to include the DoctrineExtensions.
    – aefxx
    Commented Feb 14, 2013 at 15:38
  • 2
    @aefxx My answer does in fact also explain the general general problem, which is that the require field must be specified.
    – igorw
    Commented Feb 14, 2013 at 20:42
  • 6
    The VCS repo docs explain all of this quite well. ... what?
    – hek2mgl
    Commented Jan 21, 2014 at 19:09
139

At the time of writing in 2013, this was one way to do it. Composer has added support for better ways: See @igorw 's answer

DO YOU HAVE A REPOSITORY?

Git, Mercurial and SVN is supported by Composer.

DO YOU HAVE WRITE ACCESS TO THE REPOSITORY?

Yes?

DOES THE REPOSITORY HAVE A composer.json FILE

If you have a repository you can write to: Add a composer.json file, or fix the existing one, and DON'T use the solution below.

Go to @igorw 's answer

ONLY USE THIS IF YOU DON'T HAVE A REPOSITORY
OR IF THE REPOSITORY DOES NOT HAVE A composer.json AND YOU CANNOT ADD IT

This will override everything that Composer may be able to read from the original repository's composer.json, including the dependencies of the package and the autoloading.

Using the package type will transfer the burden of correctly defining everything onto you. The easier way is to have a composer.json file in the repository, and just use it.

This solution really only is for the rare cases where you have an abandoned ZIP download that you cannot alter, or a repository you can only read, but it isn't maintained anymore.

"repositories": [
    {
        "type":"package",
        "package": {
          "name": "l3pp4rd/doctrine-extensions",
          "version":"master",
          "source": {
              "url": "https://github.com/l3pp4rd/DoctrineExtensions.git",
              "type": "git",
              "reference":"master"
            }
        }
    }
],
"require": {
    "l3pp4rd/doctrine-extensions": "master"
}
13
  • 7
    Replacing the VCS repository with a package repository is a bad idea. The target repo already has a composer.json, so use a vcs repo. Your example also breaks autoloading and ignores the branch-alias.
    – igorw
    Commented Feb 14, 2013 at 20:44
  • 1
    @igorw can you please link to that information so that I and other can understand the difference? Thanks.
    – Mike Graf
    Commented Feb 15, 2013 at 17:58
  • 6
    As explained on the repositories page a package repo must include all information. If you don't add the autoload field, it will not be included. Basically you need to copy-paste all info from composer.json to the repo definition. The VCS repo fetches that info from VCS directly. The benefits of branch-alias are explained in the aliases doc and a blog post I wrote.
    – igorw
    Commented Feb 15, 2013 at 18:21
  • 2
    Why is this still being upvoted? The composer docs even explicitly state that package repos should be avoided. Please, stop encouraging bad practices.
    – igorw
    Commented Aug 18, 2013 at 10:31
  • 1
    What do you recommend I change it to then ?
    – Mike Graf
    Commented Aug 19, 2013 at 18:10
54

You can include git repository to composer.json like this:

"repositories": [
{
    "type": "package",
    "package": {
        "name": "example-package-name", //give package name to anything, must be unique
        "version": "1.0",
        "source": {
            "url": "https://github.com/example-package-name.git", //git url
            "type": "git",
            "reference": "master" //git branch-name
        }
    }
}],
"require" : {
  "example-package-name": "1.0"
}
4
  • 1
    As explained in the other answers above: If you have a repository, add a composer.json file if at all possible.
    – Sven
    Commented Mar 28, 2017 at 16:58
  • @Sven ...because it's impossible to specify a specific commit otherwise? Commented Jun 7, 2017 at 18:15
  • Thank you for sharing, saved me hours :)
    – dmytroy
    Commented Aug 12, 2017 at 23:25
  • 1
    This is adjusted to be general, but otherwise basically a plain copy of the Mike Graf's answer, so I am not sure if general is better than seeing a particular library in the question as an example.
    – FantomX1
    Commented Jul 15, 2020 at 15:47
12

I try to join the solutions mention here as there are some important points to it needed to list.

  1. As mentioned in the @igorw's answer the URL to repository must be in that case specified in the composer.json file, however since in both cases the composer.json must exist (unlike the 2nd way @Mike Graf) publishing it on the Packagist is not that much different (furthermore also Github currently provides packages services as npm packages), only difference instead of literally inputting the URL at the packagist interface once being signed up.

  2. Moreover, it has a shortcoming that it cannot rely on an external library that uses this approach as recursive repository definitions do not work in Composer. Furthermore, due to it, there seems to be a "bug" upon it, since the recursive definition failed at the dependency, respecifying the repositories explicitly in the root does not seem to be enough but also all the dependencies from the packages would have to be respecified.

With a composer file (answered Oct 18 '12 at 15:13 igorw)

{
    "repositories": [
        {
            "url": "https://github.com/l3pp4rd/DoctrineExtensions.git",
            "type": "git"
        }
    ],
    "require": {
        "gedmo/doctrine-extensions": "~2.3"
    }
}

Without a composer file (answered Jan 23 '13 at 17:28 Mike Graf)

"repositories": [
    {
        "type":"package",
        "package": {
          "name": "l3pp4rd/doctrine-extensions",
          "version":"master",
          "source": {
              "url": "https://github.com/l3pp4rd/DoctrineExtensions.git",
              "type": "git",
              "reference":"master"
            }
        }
    }
],
"require": {
    "l3pp4rd/doctrine-extensions": "master"
}
9

Just tell composer to use source if available:

composer update --prefer-source

Or:

composer install --prefer-source

Then you will get packages as cloned repositories instead of extracted tarballs, so you can make some changes and commit them back. Of course, assuming you have write/push permissions to the repository and Composer knows about project's repository.

Disclaimer: I think I may answered a little bit different question, but this was what I was looking for when I found this question, so I hope it will be useful to others as well.

If Composer does not know, where the project's repository is, or the project does not have proper composer.json, situation is a bit more complicated, but others answered such scenarios already.

1
  • I came here looking precisely for this, thanks! Though I think you need to use require--it doesn't work with install.
    – Ynhockey
    Commented Feb 22 at 22:55
4

I was encountering the following error: The requested package my-foo/bar could not be found in any version, there may be a typo in the package name.

If you're forking another repo to make your own changes you will end up with a new repository.

E.g:

https://github.com/foo/bar.git
=>
https://github.com/my-foo/bar.git

The new url will need to go into your repositories section of your composer.json.

Remember if you want refer to your fork as my-foo/bar in your require section, you will have to rename the package in the composer.json file inside of your new repo.

{
    "name":         "foo/bar",

=>

{
    "name":         "my-foo/bar",

If you've just forked the easiest way to do this is edit it right inside github.

1
  • Note that the package name does in no way reflect the URL from where you can read the repository! There is no automatic link between the two, both can be chosen independently. The only relevant information regarding Composer is the name written into the name attribute inside composer.json.
    – Sven
    Commented Mar 28, 2017 at 17:02
2

In my case, I use Symfony2.3.x and the minimum-stability parameter is by default "stable" (which is good). I wanted to import a repo not in packagist but had the same issue "Your requirements could not be resolved to an installable set of packages.". It appeared that the composer.json in the repo I tried to import use a minimum-stability "dev".

So to resolve this issue, don't forget to verify the minimum-stability. I solved it by requiring a dev-master version instead of master as stated in this post.

1
  • 5
    I had the same issue, which is discussed here. If you have an explicit ref (like a git commit), it appears you can do something like "dev-master#4536bbc166ada96ff2a3a5a4b6e636b093103f0e".
    – Blaskovicz
    Commented Jul 18, 2016 at 22:10
1

If you want to use a composer.json from GitHub you would look at this example (under the VCS section).

The package section is for packages that do not have the composer.json. However, you didn't follow that example as well or it would also have worked. Do read what it says about package repositories:

Basically, you define the same information that is included in the composer repository's packages.json, but only for a single package. Again, the minimum required fields are name, version, and either of dist or source.

-1

https://stackoverflow.com/a/14485706/11716408

{
    "repositories": [
        {
            "type":"package",
            "package": {
              "name": "tiagof2/materializecss-laravel-pagination",
              "version":"v1.0.3",
              "source": {
                  "url": "https://github.com/tiagofrancafernandes/materializecss-laravel-pagination.git",
                  "type": "git",
                  "reference":"v1.0.3"
                }
            }
        }
    ],
    "require": {
        "tiagof2/materializecss-laravel-pagination": "v1.0.3"
    },
}
composer update
3
  • Why did you copy/paste the accepted answer?
    – bfontaine
    Commented Nov 13, 2023 at 10:30
  • I did not do this. This is standard for package creation. This is the composer.json of a package, see for yourself Commented Dec 1, 2023 at 16:32
  • 1
    Ok sorry, I thought that because this is the same code as the accepted answer, only 9 years later.
    – bfontaine
    Commented Dec 1, 2023 at 17:40

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.