I actually intentionally placed the note at the top when rewriting the serializer documentation. See#17783 (comment) for a bit of the reasoning. I think this still holds true.

Can you elaborate a bit on what confusion you think this will cause readers? Maybe we can reword it slightly?

@wouterj I indeed missed that discussion, thanks for the link! 😃

I am still not entirely convinced, and will share my reasoning.

But this isall but an important topic, so I will not mind if you skip it :)

If someone is reading theSerializer page on symfony.com there are two cases: eithersymfony/serializer is already in their composer.json or it is not :)

If it is already installed, readers usually come for usage docs (and in Google the link is titledHow to Use the Serializer). They will probably ignore the block but, if not, the "popular" wording feelsunusual for Symfony docs, which makes it stand out and can then confuse.

If not, the reader's goal is probably either to discover the component or toinstall it because a CTO or tool requires it. In both situations, pointing toanother library at the end of the install steps adds little context and mostly risks creating doubts or mistakes.

Finally, one could askwhy this library (other serializers may be more "popular" today) and whyonly this one (components like HttpClient, Filesystem, or Uid do not suggest alternatives in their docs).

Well... just me overthinking details again 😇