Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-17 10:32 UTC

Payum / PayumBundle

Payum offers everything you need to work with payments. From simplest use cases to very advanced ones.

PHPMIT★ 580 stars⑂ 144 forkssince Dec 2012View on GitHub ↗
KindPluginLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined

Payum/PayumBundle holds a health index of 62 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (69/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (37/100). It was last updated 36 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

62
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.

62
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 58 is calibrated to 62 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

PayumOrganization
48 followers31 public repossince Oct 2012

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

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

53Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 36 days ago
2.8/36Commit cadence — 4/52 weeks with commits
10.6/18Commit volume — 14 commits in the last year
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
commits_last_year14
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push36
active_weeks_last_year4
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 67 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 37 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~216.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count67
latest_release_tag2.7.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release37
mean_days_between_releases216.4
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?

66Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
44.8/60Stars — 580 stars
18/25Forks — 144 forks
6.7/15Watchers — 17 watchers
Inputs used
forks144
stars580
watchers17
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges3
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, poser.pugx.org
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
70.9/80Monthly downloads — 206,968 downloads/month across packagist
11.4/20Registry dependents — 50 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagespayum/payum-bundle
dependents50
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads11,435,451
monthly_downloads206,968
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

69Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 79% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 68 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 23 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled68
top_contributor_share0.789
How it's scored
37.8/42Issue resolution — 90% of issues closed
25.3/30PR acceptance — 236/280 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
10.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 12/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
merged_prs236
open_issues29
closed_issues263
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.901
closed_unmerged_prs44
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
12.2/25Owner reach — 48 followers of Payum
23/25Track record — 31 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers48
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginPayum
public_repos31
account_age_days5,076

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 71 days ago
20/20Version history — 82 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespayum/payum-bundle
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish71

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

62Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
6/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 5 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://payum.dev
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspayment, symfony, papyal, stripe, be2bill, payex
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://payum.dev
docs_sitehttps://payum.dev
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

38Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0.8/2.5CI-Tests — 5 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 3
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5.2/7.5Code-Review — Found 12/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 23 contributing companies or organizations
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
0.8/7.5Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
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 — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate3.8
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.

37Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://payum.gitbook.io/llms.txt)
30.4/40Legible commit history — 57 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://payum.gitbook.io/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.57
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
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
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/133 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes25,753
source_files_sampled133
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

580GitHub stars
68contributors
14commits, last 12 months
36days since last push
67releases
1bus factor
29open 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 ★ / 144 ⇿
0Stars
144Forks
66Releases

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.

025507510012515013632013-022019-092026-04
Major 2Minor 18Patch 44

Each point covers 13 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.8 / 10
3.8aggregate

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 · 2026-09-17 10:32 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
3CI-Tests5 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 3
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7Code-ReviewFound 12/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
10Contributorsproject has 23 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
1Maintained1 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
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
Direct dependencies 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistpayum/core^1.7.2composer.json
Packagistsymfony/framework-bundle^5.4 || ^6.0 || ^7.0 || ^8.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/form^5.4 || ^6.0 || ^7.0 || ^8.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/validator^5.4 || ^6.0 || ^7.0 || ^8.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/security-csrf^5.4 || ^6.0 || ^7.0 || ^8.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/dependency-injection^5.4 || ^6.4 || ^7.0 || ^8.0composer.json
All dependencies 31

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 6 direct and 25 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistpayum/core—direct
Packagistsymfony/dependency-injection—direct
Packagistsymfony/form—direct
Packagistsymfony/framework-bundle—direct
Packagistsymfony/security-csrf—direct
Packagistsymfony/validator—direct
Packagistdefuse/php-encryption—indirect
Packagistdoctrine/orm—indirect
Packagistnyholm/psr7—indirect
Packagistomnipay/common—indirect
Packagistomnipay/dummy—indirect
Packagistomnipay/paypal—indirect
Packagistpayum/offline—indirect
Packagistpayum/omnipay-v3-bridge—indirect
Packagistpayum/paypal-express-checkout-nvp—indirect
Packagistpayum/stripe—indirect
Packagistphp—indirect
Packagistphp-http/guzzle7-adapter—indirect
Packagistphp-http/message-factory—indirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunit—indirect
Packagistpsr/log—indirect
Packagiststripe/stripe-php—indirect
Packagistsymfony/browser-kit—indirect
Packagistsymfony/expression-language—indirect
Packagistsymfony/http-client—indirect
Packagistsymfony/phpunit-bridge—indirect
Packagistsymfony/templating—indirect
Packagistsymfony/twig-bundle—indirect
Packagistsymfony/web-profiler-bundle—indirect
Packagistsymfony/yaml—indirect
Packagisttwig/twig—indirect
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 statistics — Packagist.