Workbench Laravel Package

Product Decisions This Supports

• Accelerating Package Development: Reduces manual setup time for Laravel package creators, enabling faster iteration and prototyping.
• Standardizing Package Structure: Ensures consistency in package scaffolding (e.g., directories, files, and configurations), improving maintainability and onboarding for contributors.
• Developer Tooling Roadmap: Justifies investment in CLI-driven workflows for internal teams building reusable Laravel components (e.g., auth modules, payment gateways).
• Build vs. Buy Decision: Avoids reinventing scaffolding logic, saving engineering time compared to custom scripts or frameworks like Laravel’s make:package (if unavailable).
• Use Cases:
  • Kickstarting new open-source Laravel packages.
  • Bootstrapping internal company packages (e.g., company/auth, company/api-clients).
  • Onboarding junior developers to package development best practices.

When to Consider This Package

• Adopt if:

  • Your team frequently builds Laravel packages and needs a repeatable, opinionated scaffold (e.g., 3+ packages/year).
  • You prioritize developer velocity over customization (e.g., no need for bespoke directory structures).
  • Your packages follow standard Laravel conventions (e.g., Service Providers, Facades, Console commands).
  • You lack a dedicated internal package boilerplate or use ad-hoc scripts (e.g., laravel-new templates).

• Look Elsewhere if:

  • Your packages require highly customized structures (e.g., monorepo setups, non-Laravel integrations).
  • You need advanced features like multi-package scaffolding, GitHub Actions integration, or CI/CD hooks (consider Laravel Shift or Orchid).
  • Your team prefers visual tools (e.g., Laravel Jetstream, Statamic) over CLI workflows.
  • The package’s maturity is a concern (low stars, no dependents; evaluate risk vs. reward).

How to Pitch It (Stakeholders)

For Executives: "This package cuts the time to create a new Laravel package from 30+ minutes of manual setup to under 2 minutes with a single CLI command. For a team shipping 5+ packages/year, that’s ~25 hours saved annually—time we can reinvest in core features or innovation. It’s like GitHub Copilot for package scaffolding: standardized, fast, and low-risk (MIT-licensed). Let’s pilot it for our next internal package to measure the impact."

For Engineering: *"Workbench is a lightweight, Laravel-native way to scaffold packages with zero config overhead. It handles:

• Standard directories (src/, config/, tests/).
• Essential files (Service Provider, Facade stubs, CHANGELOG.md).
• Vendor/package naming conventions.

Pros: ✅ Zero learning curve—just php artisan workbench vendor/package. ✅ MIT license—no legal blockers. ✅ Extensible—we can tweak the published config (config/workbench.php) for our needs.

Cons: ⚠️ Limited customization (but we can fork it if needed). ⚠️ New package (4 stars, but the code is simple to audit).

Proposal: Use it for our next package (company/payments) as a proof of concept. If it saves us 10+ hours, we can adopt it company-wide or contribute back to the repo."*

For Developers: *"Tired of manually creating composer.json, README.md, and src/ folders for every new package? This CLI tool does it in one command and follows Laravel best practices. Example:

php artisan workbench larastarscn/test

It even auto-fills your name/email in the config. Try it on your next side project—if you like it, we can push it into our internal tooling."*