Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-27 20:16 UTC

Behat / Gherkin

Gherkin parser, written in PHP for Behat project

PHPMIT★ 1,065 stars⑂ 94 forkssince Jan 2011View on GitHub ↗

Behat/Gherkin holds a health index of 84 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (80/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (45/100). It was last updated 21 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

84
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

84
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 71 is calibrated to 84 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

BehatOrganization
48 followers33 public repossince Jan 2011

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagistbehat/gherkinv4.17.03,024,34168101 days agobddparserdslbehatgherkincucumber

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

65Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recencylast push 21 days ago
12.5/36Commit cadence18/52 weeks with commits
15.3/18Commit volume50 commits in the last year
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
commits_last_year50
human_commit_share0.79
days_since_last_push21
active_weeks_last_year18
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases20 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 101 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~186.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count20
latest_release_tagv4.17.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release101
mean_days_between_releases186.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Community & Adoption

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

77Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
49.1/60Stars1,065 stars
16.4/25Forks94 forks
6.5/15Watchers16 watchers
Inputs used
forks94
stars1,065
watchers16
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads3,024,341 downloads/month across packagist
13.3/20Registry dependents97 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesbehat/gherkin
dependents97
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads190,535,989
monthly_downloads3,024,341
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

76Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11.3/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 50% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth38 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 30 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled38
top_contributor_share0.496
How it's scored
39.2/42Issue resolution93% of issues closed
22.3/30PR acceptance236/318 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs236
open_issues7
closed_issues98
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.933
closed_unmerged_prs82
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 backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
12.2/25Owner reach48 followers of Behat
23.2/25Track record33 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers48
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginBehat
public_repos33
account_age_days5,713

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 101 days ago
20/20Version history68 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesbehat/gherkin
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish101

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.php-cs-fixer.dist.php
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests23 out of 23 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://behat.org/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsgherkin-parser, php, gherkin, behat, dsl
has_wikino
homepage
docs_sitehttps://behat.org/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

61Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests23 out of 23 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 30 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
1.5/7.5Maintained3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate6.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, 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.

45Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history73 of 79 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.924
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
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance8 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.08
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePHP without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/111 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes41,537
source_files_sampled111
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

1,065GitHub stars
38contributors
50commits, last 12 months
21days since last push
20releases
2bus factor
7open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 94 ⇿
0Stars
94Forks
20Releases

When each star and fork was added, collected from GitHub and bucketed by day. Cumulative growth sits directly above the daily additions it is made of, so the two read against each other: steady organic accretion looks nothing like an abrupt, short-lived burst. Where that difference is measurable, it is reported as growth authenticity.

0204060801009232011-112019-042026-08
Major 0Minor 13Patch 7

Each point covers 14 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.1 / 10
6.1aggregate

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 · 2026-08-27 20:16 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests23 out of 23 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 30 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
2Maintained3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
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
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 10

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 10 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistcomposer-runtime-apiindirect
Packagistcucumber/gherkin-monorepoindirect
Packagistfriendsofphp/php-cs-fixerindirect
Packagistmikey179/vfsstreamindirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistphpstan/extension-installerindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstanindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-phpunitindirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunitindirect
Packagistsymfony/yamlindirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

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 statisticsPackagist.