Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-30 19:34 UTC

ArtisanPack-UI / cms-framework

The flexible backbone for your next CMS. This powerful framework provides all the necessary backend scaffolding, empowering you to create a tailored content management experience for any project. It handles everything from users and roles to dashboard widgets to tables and models for content, so you can skip scaffolding and start building.

PHPMIT★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Feb 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined

ArtisanPack-UI/cms-framework holds a health index of 63 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (85/100) and lowest on Security (33/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

63
overall / 100
Moderate

Software health index

Metrics are grouped into weighted categories on one standardized 1–100 scale. Overall starts as their weighted mean, calibrated against the distribution of the public record so bands carry percentile meaning; when public evidence triggers the High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy, the rating is adjusted and receives an At Risk ceiling of 34.

63
Exceptional93-100The record's top tier (≈ top 5%); essentially all checked criteria met
Excellent80-92Strong across the board; minor gaps
Good65-79Healthy; gaps are limited and manageable
Moderate50-64Acceptable with notable gaps; review recommended
Weak35-49Material weaknesses across several areas
At Risk20-34Significant weaknesses; adoption warrants caution
Critical1-19Severe problems (abandoned, single-maintainer, no hygiene)
VitalityCommunity &AdoptionSustainability &GovernanceEngineeringQualitySecurityAI Readiness

Score profile

Each axis is a category. The shape matters more than the average — a healthy subject fills the whole shape, while a spike-and-crater profile means strength in one dimension is masking risk in another.

The weighted overall 59 is calibrated to 63 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

ArtisanPack UIOrganization
0 followers54 public repossince Jan 2026

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Packagistartisanpack-ui/cms-framework2.12.12,301330 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?

85Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
16.6/36Commit cadence — 24/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 381 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 28 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year381
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year24
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 33 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~6.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count33
latest_release_tagv2.12.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases6.9

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

37Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 0 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
44.8/80Monthly downloads — 2,301 downloads/month across packagist
2/20Registry dependents — 1 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesartisanpack-ui/cms-framework
dependents1
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads3,776
monthly_downloads2,301
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

55Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
41.2/42Issue resolution — 98% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance — 143/143 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs143
open_issues4
closed_issues203
prs_merged_7d5
prs_decided_7d5
prs_merged_30d10
prs_decided_30d10
issue_closed_ratio0.981
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
0/25Owner reach — 0 followers of ArtisanPack-UI
14/25Track record — 54 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers0
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginArtisanPack-UI
public_repos54
account_age_days241

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 33 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesartisanpack-ui/cms-framework
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

77Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .php-cs-fixer.dist.php, phpcs.xml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
8/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 5 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 10 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsblog, cms, content-management, headless-cms, laravel, laravel-cms, laravel-package, pages, php, themes
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?

33At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
1/2.5CI-Tests — 5 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 28 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
3.8/7.5Vulnerabilities — 5 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated14
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive4
scorecard_aggregate3.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

AI Readiness

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight (4%): agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but a repository with none can still reach 100/100.

50Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 99 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.99
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .php-cs-fixer.dist.php, phpcs.xml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 44 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilescomposer.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.44
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — PHP without a type-check config
54.7/55Manageable file sizes — 3/601 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes167,846
source_files_sampled601
oversized_source_files3
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
0/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

0GitHub stars
1contributors
381commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
33releases
1bus factor
4open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.3 / 10
3.3aggregate

Independent, tool-agnostic security assessment from the open-source OpenSSF Scorecard. Each check rewards a security practice, not a specific vendor's tool. Checks Scorecard could not determine are marked n/a and excluded from the security score (never counted as zero).Scorecard v5.5.0 · 2026-09-30 19:34 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
4CI-Tests5 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 28 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
5Vulnerabilities5 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 11
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistilluminate/support^12.17.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistlaravel/framework^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistlaravel/tinker^2.10.1|^3.0composer.json
Packagistartisanpack-ui/accessibility^2.1.0composer.json
Packagistartisanpack-ui/security^1.0.3|^2.0composer.json
Packagistartisanpack-ui/core^1.0composer.json
Packagistartisanpack-ui/hooks^1.3composer.json
Packagistartisanpack-ui/rbac^1.0composer.json
Packagistdedoc/scramble^0.12 || ^0.13composer.json
Packagistjustinrainbow/json-schema^6.0composer.json
Packagistlaravel/sanctum^4.0.8composer.json
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

Raw JSON report machine-readable

Feedback

Spotted something off in this report, or have thoughts to share? Wrong measurements, missed tooling, ideas, questions — anything is welcome. Every message is read and gets a response.

The message is kept through sign-in.

Scores are signals, not warranties. They reflect publicly visible practices on GitHub — not a code audit, and not a security guarantee.

Missing data is excluded and weights renormalized, never scored as zero. Methodology is versioned and open: metrics v2.10.0, schema v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — Packagist.