- Does philetaylor/assetic-bundle work with Laravel?
- No. It is a Symfony bundle that registers services through Symfony's bundle system, wires Assetic into the Symfony container and Twig, and exposes {% javascripts %} and {% stylesheets %} tags. Laravel has no bundle concept, no Twig, and no Assetic integration, so a Laravel app cannot consume it without writing an adapter from scratch. That adapter would be strictly worse than Laravel's built-in Vite pipeline.
- What is philetaylor/assetic-bundle actually for?
- It is a fork of symfony/assetic-bundle that restores the Assetic service wiring and Twig tags after Assetic was dropped from Symfony core. Its only coherent use case is a legacy Symfony 4 application that already used Assetic and needs to ship a framework upgrade without rewriting its asset pipeline. It is not intended for new Symfony projects and is not a Laravel package.
- How do I install philetaylor/assetic-bundle?
- Within a legacy Symfony 4 app you would run composer require philetaylor/assetic-bundle, register the bundle in config/bundles.php, and keep your existing assetic: configuration verbatim. You also need the filter binaries your config references, such as java, sass, or uglifyjs, present on the host. Check the fork commit and its composer.json constraints against your PHP, symfony/framework-bundle, twig-bundle, process, filesystem, and config versions before committing.
- Which Laravel versions does this package support?
- None. The package does not target Laravel at all; its Composer constraints are written against Symfony and Twig components rather than illuminate/* packages. There is no service provider, no Blade directive, and no Laravel container hook. Treat any Laravel version claim as a category error.
- Can I use Assetic's {% javascripts %} and {% stylesheets %} tags in Blade templates?
- No. Those tags are Twig syntax provided by this Symfony bundle, and Blade has no equivalent tag or Assetic integration. You would have to build a custom Blade directive and a Laravel-side asset resolver from scratch to approximate them. That effort produces a slower, less capable version of what Vite already gives you.
- What should Laravel developers use instead of Assetic?
- Use Vite, which is Laravel's default asset pipeline, with the @vite Blade directive and laravel-vite-plugin for compiling, versioning, and hot reloading. Older applications can stay on Laravel Mix until they are ready to migrate. Neither needs Assetic, Twig, or host-installed filter binaries like java or uglifyjs.
- Does philetaylor/assetic-bundle still work with Symfony 5, 6, or 7?
- It targets the legacy Symfony 4 era that still used Assetic; Assetic was dropped from Symfony core years ago and has had no meaningful releases since. Every PHP, Symfony, and Twig bump risks an unresolvable Composer conflict or a fatal deprecation with no upstream patch path. Verify the fork's constraints, especially the Twig 2 versus Twig 3 API surface, before attempting any upgrade.
- Which filters does philetaylor/assetic-bundle support and what do they require?
- It supports the common Assetic filters such as Less, Sass, CoffeeScript, and UglifyJS, plus custom filters. Each filter shells out to a host binary like sass, compass, coffee, uglifyjs, closure, or java, so the toolchain is unpinned and drifts between laptops, CI runners, and production images. Treat every filter you enable as a separate CI image dependency and a separate end-of-life obligation.
- Is philetaylor/assetic-bundle safe and maintained enough for production?
- Treat it as high risk. It has zero stars, zero dependents, a single maintainer, and an abandoned upstream lineage, so there is no community bug surface, no security review, and no credible path to a patched release if a transitive dependency is CVE'd. If you must keep it, get a private fork or vendored copy pre-approved and name an internal owner in case the repository is archived.
- How should I handle development versus production assets with this bundle?
- Assetic compiles assets on demand in debug mode but requires assetic:dump at deploy time for production, so the artifact you tested is not necessarily the artifact you ship unless the dump is enforced. Make assetic:dump deterministic in your pipeline and verify the dumped output after deploy. If your asset surface is small and stable, a CDN plus native helpers may let you drop the dependency entirely.