1

I've created a staging version of an application, mirroring what I have in development. However, I had a few problems with the routing on staging and one suggestion was to run composer update.

Since doing that I've made changes on development and I'm now one commit ahead of the repo, and by extension — staging.

What I wasn't aware of at the time was that the "composer.lock" file had been updated on staging.

I understand that I do need to keep the changes in the lock file on staging.

What would be the best course of action in this scenario?

In more explicit terms: What steps would I need to follow to avoid conflicts with Git?

Improve this question
4
  • 1
    Possible duplicate of Should composer.lock be committed to version control?
    – Ishan Thilina Somasiri
    Commented Jan 8, 2018 at 13:27
  • That answers part of the question, but not how I resolve the potential issues with Git.
    – Wayne Smallman
    Commented Jan 8, 2018 at 14:08
  • Which are the potential issues? In your staging system, you should never run composer update, but do this in your dev environment and then commit the new lock file
    – Nico Haase
    Commented Jan 8, 2018 at 18:49
  • Yeah, I know that now, but now I have a lock file with changes, plus a bunch of updates to the Composer packages. I need to reconcile staging with development without screwing up the repo.
    – Wayne Smallman
    Commented Jan 8, 2018 at 21:57
Related questions
643
Should composer.lock be committed to version control?
13
Composer.lock in library
26
Composer & composer.lock in GIT and merge conflicts
Load 7 more related questions Show fewer related questions

0

Reset to default

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.