Weave Code
Weaver
Helps Laravel developers discover, compare, and choose open-source packages. See popularity, security, maintainers, and scores at a glance to make better decisions.
Feedback
Share your thoughts, report bugs, or suggest improvements.
Subject
Message

Supervisor Laravel Package

ivan1986/supervisor

ivan1986/supervisor is a Laravel package for managing Supervisor process configuration and control. It helps define and generate worker programs for queues and background jobs, simplifying deployment and keeping supervised processes organized.

View on GitHub
Deep Wiki
Context7

Product Decisions This Supports

  • Build vs. buy for worker/daemon control: This package is the "buy" candidate for a very narrow job — listing, starting, stopping, and inspecting Supervisord-managed processes from inside a PHP admin surface. It is effectively a thin wrapper over Supervisord's XML-RPC/supervisorctl interface, so the real decision is whether a ~200-line adapter is worth owning versus vendoring someone else's.
  • Roadmap input for an ops/admin panel: If the roadmap includes an internal "background jobs" or "service health" screen (a poor-man's Horizon for non-Laravel worker types, cron-style consumers, or custom daemons), this package is a concrete reference for the feature set users will expect: process list, status, uptime, restart, log tail.
  • Deploy and incident tooling: A "restart workers" button tied to a deploy hook or an on-call runbook is a real, high-frequency use case. This package demonstrates the minimal API surface needed to justify building that into an internal admin rather than shelling into boxes.
  • Platform/stack signaling: The repository is a Symfony bundle, not a Laravel package — no service provider, no Laravel config publishing. That is itself a product finding: for a Laravel roadmap, this is at best a design reference, not a dependency. It also informs the "which ecosystem do we standardize on for ops tooling" conversation.
  • Risk triage on third-party dependencies: 8 stars, 0 dependents, no visible maintenance cadence, and a WTFPL license are decision-grade facts. The PM output is a "do not adopt as a dependency; mine for the pattern" call, plus a note that WTFPL will fail most legal/compliance reviews regardless of technical merit.

When to Consider This Package

Adopt-adjacent (as reference or a vendored/forked starting point) when:

  • You are on Symfony (the actual target), on a legacy PHP version, and need an internal-only Supervisord control panel quickly.
  • The work is non-customer-facing, low blast-radius ops tooling where an unmaintained dependency is tolerable and you can pin/fork it.
  • You need a worked example of Supervisord's control API in PHP to validate feasibility and scope a 1–2 day internal build.
  • Legal has explicitly cleared WTFPL (rare) or you are forking under your own license, which the WTFPL permits.

Look elsewhere when:

  • You are on Laravel — use Laravel Horizon (Redis queues) or a first-party supervisorctl/XML-RPC client; this bundle gives you nothing out of the box.
  • The feature is production-critical or customer-facing: no support, no tests you can rely on, no dependents means no community to catch breakage.
  • You need PHP 8.x support, security patching, or an SLA — nothing here suggests that is maintained.
  • Your orchestration target is containers/Kubernetes or systemd: Supervisord-in-container is a known anti-pattern; solve it at the platform layer (K8s probes, systemd units, Deployer/Envoy tasks) instead.
  • Compliance or procurement requires an OSI-approved license — WTFPL is a blocker on its own.

How to Pitch It (Stakeholders)

To executives: This is not a purchase decision, it's a don't buy decision with a useful byproduct. The package is a small, unmaintained Symfony bundle (8 stars, zero dependents, WTFPL license) that controls Supervisord from PHP. We should not take a dependency on it — the license and maintenance posture are disqualifying for anything we'd run in production. What we should do is use it as a 1-day feasibility reference and build the equivalent 100–200 lines ourselves against Supervisord's documented control API, which we own and can test. Estimated cost: 1–3 engineer-days, versus an unbounded risk of inheriting dead code with a non-standard license. If the real need is queue visibility, the honest answer is Laravel Horizon (if we're on Redis queues) — not this.

To engineering: Treat it as a spec, not a library. The value is the API shape (list/status/start/stop/logs against supervisorctl or XML-RPC) and the reminder that Supervisord is scriptable. Forking is legally fine under WTFPL but a fork means we own it forever — so own it deliberately, with tests, or don't start. Also flag the ecosystem mismatch: it's a Symfony bundle, so any Laravel integration is greenfield work regardless.

Recommendation: Do not adopt as a dependency. Use as a design reference at most; prefer Horizon, native supervisorctl scripting, or a small in-house client. Revisit only if we standardize on Symfony for internal ops tooling and legal clears the license.

Weaver

How can I help you explore Laravel packages today?

Conversation history is not saved when not logged in.
Prompt
Add packages to context
No packages found.
mehedimi/laravel-amp-mail
happones/laravel-vue-i18n-generator
jwerd/inertia-table
siberfx/flysystem-wasabi
hollyit/token-replace
ippanelcom/laravel-sdk
adachsoft/changelog-linter
adachsoft/collection
payerurl/telegrambot-crypto-payment-instant-payout
dskripchenko/laravel-hybrid-search
riorizkyrainey/lara-ced
mehedimi/static-vel
zharp/zharp
nonsapiens/bigquery-model-sync
lgu-bayambang-ict-office/lgu-laravel-development-standards
andydefer/laravel-support
se7enxweb/flysystem
lampwick/laravel
jeslage/statamic-emojis
micahdshackelford/rmap-laravel