Yeah, I do the same. Most of what I do is Next.js + a good bunch of npm packages to get the "full stack". But I wouldn't call Next.js full stack because it can do SSR, or even API routes. But again, that's just me confused about what is "full stack".
In the case of laravel, I think that having by default a pretty awesome templating system (which even allows for components), a webpack based build system for frontend assets, easy way to serve, cache and bust assets, and a trivially easy way to submit forms and validate user input makes it pretty full stack. Same for Rails, and not event talking about HotWire/LiveWire with might not be considered parts of the framework per se.
To me Laravels is pretty more close to a "full stack" framework than Fresh to be honest.
well, I agree.... but to me the baseline is, as I said, Rails/Laravel/Django... there's a common subset of things you need in like 99% of web applications that are not just a rest API or a landing page.
Am I the only one that think nowadays anything can be called "full stack"?
For me "full stack" is something like Rails, Laravel, Django, etc.
Or is it just being able to run code on the server enough to be "full stack"?
I'm missing the translations system, the validations, the background jobs, the authentication system, authorization helpers, email sending, ORM or data access layer, testing framework, CSRF and related security protections, logging, error handling framework, etc, etc, etc.
To me that's a "full stack" framework. If just running code on the backend and on the frontend is enough, then I can make a bash script a full stack framework, right?
A few years ago I worked for a company that used https://shortcut.com/ (at that point, it was named clubhouse I think). I loved it. I think that tool can do everything Jira does in a much better and saner way. It looks a lot more organised, more flexible, more polished, more performant and it doesn't look like it will force you into full SCRUM if you don't want to. You even get to use the same syntax (markdown!) everywhere. Last time I had to use Jira I needed to keep in mind the syntax for writing links in the issue description was different than the syntax for writing links in comments. Tell me that's not some top level suckery.
Jira sucks big time, and there are better tools now. The reason no one "toppled the Jira crown" is just inertia, specially management inertia who are the ones deciding what tool to use. For the same reason we're still mostly using petrol for cars, not because there aren't better options, it is because it is not easy to change.
The benefits of frameworks is that there's shared knowledge on how to use it, lots of documentation and they are more battle proven.
There's a reason people are not writing assembler. Reinventing the wheel every single time has its trade offs too.