[TYPO3-core] Decide on community vendor name for CMS

Christian Kuhn lolli at schwarzbu.ch
Mon Apr 28 19:30:54 CEST 2014


On 04/24/2014 11:38 PM, Ernesto Baschny [cron] wrote:
> I also agree with Tom also that we don't need (or even don't want) to
> have a standard "typo3 extensions vendor name". A vendor name is not the
> place to define the "type" of a package. In the composer world, you
> define the type of your package in the composer.json, "type". TYPO3 CMS
> extensions have a "typo3-cms-extension" type, and that's enough.
> If an extension is an individual development, he uses his own vendor name.
> If it is work of a "team", give this particular team a name (like "EBT").
> If the extension is later moved over to a different new maintainer, they
> simply use a new vendor name.
> The extension key can stay the same.


I tend to share these thought now. This is "just" a vendor, and it can 

If a package is developed by a team, and the team wants to reflect this 
in the vendor name, it may be a nice idea to have something TYPO3 
related in it. Examples could be T3Share, InpiringCMS, T3Familiy, T3Ext 
(this is not a recommendation!). As far as I understood, packagist also 
does not have any vendor registration or something like that.

I think we should make clear that the core will not recommend a generic 
vendor that should be used. Packages with certain vendor names have no 
special standing and we have no influence or control.


More information about the TYPO3-team-core mailing list