FWIW that hasn't been my experience at all. The documentation is great and well maintained. The repo is public and you can see all changes here: https://github.com/laravel/docs
Here[1], for instance, is someone in this very response thread talking about how the core getting started Laracasts are out of date and they're confused which documentation they should reference. This will probably be addressed pretty soon (see the comment) but I think this is a very real danger with promising to deliver non-text based documentation.
And Laracasts is a 3rd party learning resource anyway, with the first party docs all being well maintained.
1. https://laravel.com/docs/9.x/upgrade
2. https://laracasts.com/series/laravel-8-from-scratch/episodes...
It seems like an unnecessary risk to have adopted given that it's not at all standard in the industry - sometimes language designers will give a version specific tutorial but they're understood to be unmaintained with the docos being the official source... Laracasts are a very different thing which appear to be mostly working, but seem really likely to dramatically and suddenly become more of a danger than a benefit.
One parallel I would draw on is the community effort, when PHP 5.3 or 5.4 came out, to purge all the terrible advice from StackOverflow. PHP had an issue, its documentation on php.net was fine and followed best practices, but the StackOverflow answers were often _terrible_ like - this will cause a big gaping hole in your security instantly terrible. It took a significant amount of effort to delete or properly answer these sources and since that happened the reputation of PHP has hugely improved. Bad documentation existing is worse than no documentation existing (but please don't take this as an excuse to not comment your code, just be conservative in your comments and keep it to a level you can actually afford to maintain).