Rename to SymfonyExtension and Symfony 4

[sroze]

Instead of creating another one, I propose:

1. To rename the extension (and all the class namespaces) to "SymfonyExtension" instead of "Symfony2Extension"
2. Release a version 3.0.0 with these name changes, which supports Symfony 3.4+
3. Support autowiring from version 3.0.0

WDYT ? :)

[jon-acker]

What was the rational behind re-writing it then?

[ciaranmcnulty]

What do you think about splitting the Mink driver integration from the service container integration?

Probably the new versions can use the existing PSR-11 mechanism and simply hook in the container

[stof]

if we rename the package, change the namespace and rewrite a big part of the code (to benefit from both Symfony new features but also Behat 3.4+ ones), we might a well consider it as a new extension though

[DavidGarciaCat]

As @sroze suggested, I see the benefit of SymfonyExtension, but as @stof has pointed, this could imply a new extension, especially in order to keep BC for existing projects. May I suggest a new repository that could be a clone of this one + the NameSpace changes?

[DavidGarciaCat]

Even if the extension is not renamed, IMO the Symfony 4 support should be applied, in order to be used on new projects. It's really frustrating when we can see that BeHat is already implementing a Symfony Recipe however I cannot install it to test Symfony 4 + BeHat

[sroze]

This will help with Symfony 4.1: #139.