Developers

Inspect the runtime, learn the boundaries, then shape the platform.

Morpheus OS is meant to be evaluated from the inside. Technical teams can bootstrap locally, inspect the stack, understand the extension model, and decide where the platform belongs in their architecture.

$ git clone github.com/magnetoid/morpheus
$ cd morpheus
$ cp .env.example .env
$ docker compose up -d
 
database migrations applied
core services healthy
plugin runtime initialized
admin: http://localhost:8000/admin
What to inspect first

Runtime, hooks, themes, plugins, and operator boundaries.

A good evaluation path gets teams from bootstrap to architecture judgment quickly, rather than leaving them with a black-box demo.

Evaluation frame

What technical teams usually want to verify first.

The point is not only whether Morpheus works. It is whether the platform is understandable enough to own, extend, and keep healthy as the business changes.

Runtime

Can we reason about the stack?

Yes. The platform surface is explicit and production-shaped instead of hidden behind a vague product abstraction.

Boundaries

Can we extend it without corroding it?

The extension model exists to keep future capability from turning into private hacks and accidental coupling.

Ownership

Do we control deployment tradeoffs?

Morpheus is designed for teams that want a real say in release cadence, hosting model, and architectural direction.

Layer model

Architecture quality shows up when new requirements arrive.

The layers below are about survivable change. They make it easier to decide where new storefront behavior, operator workflows, and business capability should live.

05

Apps

Customer-facing and team-facing interfaces for specific commercial contexts.

04

Plugins

Domain capability such as loyalty, subscriptions, merchandising, and shipping.

03

Themes

Presentation systems that stay separate from pricing, catalog, and fulfillment behavior.

02

SDK

Hooks and public APIs that define intended extension paths.

01

Core

The domain runtime where platform invariants and infrastructure responsibilities live.

Why it helps

Better extension decisions with less long-term debt.

  • New business capability can land in the right layer instead of the fastest one.
  • Theme work stays focused on experience rather than leaking domain rules.
  • Operator workflows remain attached to core state and events.
  • Teams can scale the platform without losing the mental model of the system.
Practical path

Bootstrap locally, inspect the contracts, then decide how far to take it.

The platform is easiest to evaluate by doing. Bring it up, inspect the GraphQL and extension surfaces, then decide which parts of your operating model should be native to the platform instead of externalized.

01

Bootstrap

Run the stack locally with the data layer, tasks, events, and operator services already wired together.

02

Inspect contracts

Understand the public APIs, hooks, and theme responsibilities before adding your own logic.

03

Extend deliberately

Shape workflows, plugins, and business rules in the places intended for change.

04

Deploy on your terms

Move from local proof to self-hosted or managed use without changing the platform philosophy.

Evaluation checklist

Questions worth answering before adoption.

  • Are the public APIs clear enough to communicate intended extension paths?
  • Do themes stay separate from domain behavior in practice?
  • How do operator workflows connect to store state and events?
  • Does the hosting and ownership model fit how your team wants to work?
Keep moving

Use the product, Linda AI, and pricing pages to complete the evaluation.

The developer path explains how to inspect the stack. The other pages explain what the product is for, how the operator layer works, and how teams can start with Community before moving deeper.