Symfony Bundle Skeleton Laravel Package

Product Decisions This Supports

• Build vs. buy for internal shared code: this is a scaffolding tool for creating reusable Symfony bundles — it directly supports the decision of whether to extract shared domain logic (auth, billing, notifications, audit logging) into a versioned bundle versus copy-pasting across apps. It lowers the cost of the "extract" path to roughly one command plus your business logic.
• Standardization / platform decisions: adopting a single skeleton standardizes directory layout, DI configuration, test harness, and CI across every bundle your team ships — a governance decision more than a feature decision.
• Roadmap framing for platform teams: relevant if your roadmap includes a reusable component library, multi-app code sharing, or an internal package registry. Not relevant to end-user product features.
• Vendor/lock-in posture: the artifact is generated source you own, not a runtime dependency. That is a genuinely favorable risk profile — adopting it does not commit you to the maintainer's release cadence.
• Symfony version policy: the stated support for Symfony 7.4 LTS and 8.1 is an input to your framework upgrade planning; it signals the template is current, not that it constrains the bundles you generate.
• Explicit scope correction: the request frames this as a Laravel/PHP package. It is not — it is a Symfony bundle skeleton. Any roadmap item that assumes Laravel applicability should be re-scoped or dropped.

When to Consider This Package

Consider it when:

• You are on Symfony 7.4 LTS or 8.1 and intend to ship one or more reusable bundles (internal or eventually public).
• You want a one-command bootstrap (composer create-project tito10047/symfony-bundle-skeleton my-bundle) rather than hand-assembling composer.json, DependencyInjection/, Resources/config/, and a test setup.
• You value lineage: it is derived from yceruto/bundle-skeleton, a known reference skeleton, and is generated by an actively versioned companion tool (symfony-bundle-maker ^1.0).
• Your team is small and the marginal cost of a non-standard layout (inconsistent test/CI wiring, ad-hoc service config) is high relative to the cost of adopting a template.

Look elsewhere when:

• You are building on Laravel. This has no Laravel applicability. Use a Laravel package skeleton (orchestra/testbench-based) instead.
• You must support Symfony versions older than 7.4, or you maintain bundles spanning 6.x/7.0–7.3 — the template's own constraints will fight you.
• You only need a plain PHP library (no DI container, no config tree, no bundle class) — a PSR-4 Composer template is lighter.
• Your organization requires vendor-backed support, published SLAs, or a security response commitment. This is a single-maintainer, pre-1.x-adjacent project; treat it as a template to fork, not a dependency to rely on.
• You already have an internal skeleton. The switching cost is rarely worth it for a scaffold you use a handful of times per year.

Caveat for adoption: scaffolding tools are evaluated on output quality, not runtime behavior. Read the generated tree once, confirm the test/CI setup matches your standards, then vendor or fork it internally so upstream churn cannot surprise you.

How to Pitch It (Stakeholders)

For executives: This is a low-cost developer-productivity tool, not a product dependency. It generates the boilerplate for reusable Symfony components so engineers can share code across applications instead of rebuilding it. There is no runtime risk — nothing ships to production from this package, and the output is code we own outright. The ask is small: a time-boxed evaluation by one engineer, not a budget line.

For engineering leadership: First stable release (v1.0.0). One-command bundle bootstrap, targeting Symfony 7.4 LTS and 8.1, generated via tito10047/symfony-bundle-maker ^1.0 and derived from the well-regarded yceruto/bundle-skeleton. The value is consistency — every internal bundle gets the same layout, DI conventions, and test wiring — which pays off in onboarding and maintenance across teams. The risk is maintenance maturity: single maintainer, young project. Mitigate by forking the generated structure into our own internal template after the first successful use, at which point the upstream project becomes a one-time reference rather than an ongoing dependency. Recommend a one-sprint spike: generate one real bundle with it and compare against our current hand-rolled approach before standardizing.