[Package] L5 Package skeleton

I am not sure what this should do, it wasn't what I expected of it, I was expecting something over the framework project, but it seems light and pretty useless

I'd advice on using https://github.com/thephpleague/skeleton

@decebal2dac, it's just a skeleton repo that he was nice enough to put together, put up and share.

@nWidart what is it about https://github.com/thephpleague/skeleton that you advise and why? These are two difference purposes. One is for Laravel specific packages and the other is for phpleague packages. If you're going to recommend something generic, I'd look at something more robust like https://github.com/franzliedke/studio

Thank you for sharing @mbunge

I have pushed one also, with boilerplate code for views, config, etc... : https://github.com/RemiCollin/laravel5-package-boilerplate

@dberry : You can totally use boilerplate package with studio (it can create a package from a .git repo)

@dberry There's no such thing as 'laravel specific' or a 'phpleague' package. A package is just a PSR-4 autoload piece of code. The skeleton is also not meant for league only packages. All my packages (laravel or not) are made using that skeleton package. The one about the phpleague is specifically useful just to kickstart development with a good base. Travis-ci, scrutinizer, and more setup right of the bat.

Just clone it, replace vendor/description/other generic stuff, and you're good to go.

Studio on the other hand does a lot of stuff the old workbench did. Except that workbench was stopped since its autoloading was for from ideal. If you wan't to develop in laravel, I just use that Skeleton package, autoload it using PSR-4 in laravel, and ready. Nothing more to do.

@RemiC, looks great thanks for sharing, I'll definitely be adding that to my list. I see a studio-remic alias in my near future!

@nWidart,

Firstly, I was just interested in why you recommended Skeleton over the other package and was just looking for some substantiation rather than just a blanket statement. Which you gave in your followup.

There's no such thing as 'laravel specific' or a 'phpleague' package. A package is just a PSR-4 autoload piece of code. The > skeleton is also not meant for league only packages.

That is a very incorrect statement. I can show you literally hundreds of packages that are Laravel specific. By Laravel specific, I mean that they won't run without Laravel, that they were created to run only alongside Laravel. I can also show you hundreds, of non-PSR4 packages or Symfony or CodeIgniter specific packages... Your definition is lacking and short-sighted.

I really don't want to get into a pissing match over semantics though.

I recommended Studio, because so far it's the best (that I've seen) at what it does and it does it cleanly, efficiently and is very non-intrusive. I too use Skeleton, in conjunction with studio as well as have other repos setup so I can just do things like studio-league-skeleton``` or ```studio-module``` now I'll be addingstudio-remic`` haha.

It fits well into my workflow and my workflow is different from the next person's workflow so it might not fit for everyone. To each his/her own.

Well of course there are laravel specific packages. But here we're talking about a 'base', 'skeleton' repository. Without any code. This is the same for laravel, symfony or a standalone package.

Wanted to give you a better explanation why I recommended the Skeleton repo, sorry if it came across like a blanket statement..

@nWidart, no we're not talking about a 'base', 'skeleton' repository without any code.

The title of the topic is [Package] L5 Package skeleton and the OP's very first sentence is:

I publish a laravel package skeleton on github. Feel free to use it :)

So what we're talking about are L5 specific skeletons, that have pieces already in there like in the OPs package he/she has the ServiceProvider in place already and illuminate/support in the composer deps already, and RemiC's package takes it several steps further and skeletons out directories, route files, etc..

I get what you are saying about skeleton being a base package and completely agree. I was only asking why when the thread is about a L5 Package Skeleton would you choose a base-generic skeleton over it. Had it been a thread about generic base skeleton packages, I probably would have never asked and just hit thumbs up, but since it wasn't, I was curious what your reasoning was and that maybe you knew something I didn't.

It's cleared up now though, asked & answered.

great talk guys, I knew about the league's skeleton, i really like studio, it's light and clean, thanks @dberry .

The digital-baker git user seems to have been deleted or made private now. I just get a 404.