Laravel Todo Laravel Package

Product Decisions This Supports

• Build vs. buy for task/checklist features. Any request that boils down to "let users attach to-dos to a thing" (onboarding checklists on User, action items on Project, follow-ups on Team, QA steps on Deal) can be shipped in days rather than a sprint. This is the core decision the package informs: it converts a recurring, deceptively expensive feature request into a composer require plus a trait.
• Roadmap sequencing. Because polymorphic attachment is the whole product, one integration unlocks checklists across every model you own. That argues for scheduling a single "tasks everywhere" epic rather than per-domain to-do features, and for deferring bespoke task UI until the data model is proven.
• Scope containment on v1 features. The package deliberately ships status, priority, due-date scopes, and creator tracking — but not assignees, comments, attachments, subtasks, or notifications. That is a clean signal for where the PM must draw the MVP line: adopt the package for the task record, and keep notifications, permissions, and presentation in your own application layer.
• Differentiation risk assessment. This is generic infrastructure, not a product differentiator. It is appropriate where task tracking is table stakes (internal tooling, admin panels, back-office ops) and inappropriate where task management is the product.
• Data lifecycle planning. overdue(), dueToday(), and highPriority() scopes imply reporting and digest-email use cases ("what's late across my projects?"). The announced todos:prune command is the PM's cue to plan retention policy before volume arrives.
• Extensibility gap to flag. Events (TodoCreated, TodoCompleted, TodoCancelled) are "coming soon," which means today there is no supported hook for notifications, audit logs, or webhooks. If the roadmap depends on "notify the assignee when a task is completed," that work is blocked or requires model observers against package internals — a real coupling risk worth tracking as a dependency, not a nice-to-have.

When to Consider This Package

Adopt when most of the following hold:

• You need todos on more than one model, or you reasonably expect to. With a single model, a hand-rolled table is roughly equivalent effort and zero dependency.
• Task semantics are simple: title, status, priority, due date, creator. No assignment workflows, no subtasks, no per-task permissions.
• Your team is Laravel-native and comfortable owning the schema — you publish and run the migrations yourself, so you inherit upgrade responsibility for that table.
• You can accept v1.0.0 maturity: a young package, effectively single-maintainer, with a documented "coming soon" list. Fine for internal tooling and non-critical paths; a real diligence item for anything customer-facing or revenue-adjacent.
• The alternative is genuinely worse: a bespoke todos table plus trait plus scopes is a few days of work and then permanent maintenance. Buying wins if the package's scope vocabulary (pending/completed/overdue/dueToday) matches your product language.

Look elsewhere, or build, when:

• You need assignees, watchers, mentions, comments, or attachments. Creator tracking is not assignment; conflating them will surface as a support ticket.
• You need recurring tasks, subtasks/hierarchy, or ordering/drag-and-drop position — none are mentioned, and adding them means fighting the package's schema.
• You need multi-tenant scoping or per-task authorization. Nothing here implies policies or tenant isolation; you will be writing that layer anyway.
• You need event-driven side effects today, not "soon." The missing events are the difference between a clean integration and a pile of observers.
• You require vendor SLAs, security review, or long-term support, or your org mandates an active maintainer count and CVE response process.
• You already run a task system (Jira, Asana, Linear, GitHub Issues) and the real need is integration, not a new store of record. Two sources of truth for "what's done" is a product problem, not a technical one.

How to Pitch It (Stakeholders)

For executives: This is a small, low-cost library that gives us checklist and to-do capability on any object in the product — users, projects, teams — without building it ourselves. It turns a feature we get asked for repeatedly into days of integration work instead of a multi-week build, and it keeps our engineers focused on the parts customers actually pay for. The trade-off is maturity: it is a v1.0.0, single-maintainer package, so we would use it for internal tooling and back-office workflows first, and reassess before putting it on a customer-facing critical path.

For engineering: It is a well-scoped, tested (Pest) Laravel package with a polymorphic Todo model, a HasTodos trait, a Todo facade with for($model) query building, and useful scopes (pending, completed, overdue, highPriority, dueToday). Installation publishes config and migrations, so we own the schema — plan for that in upgrade and backup discussions. Known gaps to design around: no assignee model (creator only), no events yet, no pruning command yet, and no ordering or hierarchy fields. Recommended posture: adopt behind our own service/action layer rather than calling the facade from controllers, so that swapping it out (or wrapping it) stays a contained change, and so notification and authorization logic lives in our code where we control it.