Weave Code
Laravel Starter Kit Laravel Package
rockero-cz/laravel-starter-kit
A Laravel starter kit that provides a ready-made project scaffold with common defaults and preconfigured setup, intended to help developers bootstrap new Laravel applications faster. A compact base for starting projects without repetitive setup.
Speed up the kickoff of your Laravel projects.
Frequently asked questions about Laravel Starter Kit
- Is rockero-cz/laravel-starter-kit a Composer dependency I can require into an existing app?
- No. It is application scaffolding, not a runtime dependency, so there is no composer require and no vendor directory to bump. Adopting it means cloning or using composer create-project and then owning the generated files as your own. Upstream fixes do not land automatically after you fork.
- How do I install and start a new Laravel project with this starter kit?
- Clone the repository or run composer create-project, then run the install steps and the test suite; greenfield consumption is typically a single afternoon. Because the kit becomes your application, land the scaffold as one reviewable commit and pin the version, such as 1.3.3, in a tagged template repository so later local changes stay diffable against the pin.
- Which Laravel and PHP versions does the starter kit support?
- Check the composer.json constraints, because the kit must match your platform baseline; a starter kit that lags the current Laravel major is a liability on day one. Confirm whether 1.3.3 changed those constraints and whether the accompanying lockfile churn is acceptable. The release notes do not spell this out, so read the diff.
- Which authentication and frontend stack does it ship with?
- The kit provides authentication scaffolding and admin UI conventions, but the exact stack, whether Blade and Livewire, Inertia with Vue or React, or API-only, must be confirmed from the repository before adoption. That choice becomes your standard for every service seeded from the kit, so verify it in composer.json and the published routes, providers, and layouts. If it differs from your platform standard, scope the change as fork work rather than configuration.
- Can I use this starter kit in an existing Laravel application?
- It is weak for brownfield work and effectively zero for retrofitting an opinionated existing codebase. Do not migrate wholesale; cherry-pick discrete pieces such as the CI workflow, linting config, Docker and compose setup, base test helpers, and auth scaffolding patterns. Scope that extraction as targeted work rather than a package install.
- How do I upgrade a project already forked from this starter kit to version 1.3.3?
- There is no supported upgrade channel for an already-forked kit, so a release only matters to projects not yet created or teams willing to rebase deliberately. Diff 1.3.2 against 1.3.3, classify each hunk as bugfix, dependency, or cosmetic, port only the bugfixes, and record the port in a short changelog so the next rebase has provenance. Review hunks touching auth or session config, published migrations, and seeded stubs first.
- What changed in release 1.3.3?
- Release 1.3.3 is a patch on the 1.3.x line, and the release note body is only a compare link with no changelog prose. Semver convention implies bug fixes and dependency bumps with no public API break, but that is inference rather than evidence. Treat it as low risk by convention and unverified by content until the 1.3.2 to 1.3.3 diff is read line by line.
- Does the kit include tests, Pint, PHPStan, and CI workflows?
- Check the repository directly, because tests, Pint, PHPStan, and CI are not guaranteed by the package category description, but they are exactly what you want the kit to model if you will propagate it into every new service. If they are present, adopt them as the baseline your scaffolds inherit; if they are missing, add them in your fork before seeding projects.
- Is the package actively maintained, and what is the bus factor?
- It is a single-maintainer project with 32 stars, so the bus factor is a real question that should be answered explicitly rather than assumed. Review commit frequency, the open-issue ratio, the number of active maintainers, and response time on security reports. If the cadence does not meet your platform expectations, treat the fork as your own maintained codebase from day one.
- What risks should I check before adopting this starter kit for production?
- The structural risks are category-inherent: post-fork drift from upstream, a maintainer-controlled security posture, and baked-in opinions that may not match platform standards. The patch itself is low risk, but for a template that seeds every future service the diff is the artifact, not the version number. Close the version matrix, auth stack, tooling, and maintenance questions before sign-off, and review the 1.3.3 diff first.
Weaver
How can I help you explore Laravel packages today?