Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-15 20:05 UTC

PrinsFrank / pdfparser

PHP library to read and extract text & images from PDFs - Fast & Low memory - Built from scratch

PHPMIT★ 163 stars⑂ 14 forkssince May 2022View on GitHub ↗

PrinsFrank/pdfparser holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (89/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (48/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

86
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.

86
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 72 is calibrated to 86 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

PrinsFrankPersonal account
105 followers91 public repossince Jan 2017@franksgrandtour

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Packagistprinsfrank/pdfparserv3.1.03,9253733 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

89Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
18/36Commit cadence26/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume223 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 18 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year223
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year26

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases37 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 33 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~26.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count37
latest_release_tagv3.1.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release33
mean_days_between_releases26.8
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?

56Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
35.8/60Stars163 stars
9.3/25Forks14 forks
3.3/15Watchers5 watchers
Inputs used
forks14
stars163
watchers5
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_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
47.9/80Monthly downloads3,925 downloads/month across packagist
3.2/20Registry dependents2 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesprinsfrank/pdfparser
dependents2
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads32,884
monthly_downloads3,925
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

64Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.5/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 98% of commits
8.1/13.5Contributor breadth6 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled6
top_contributor_share0.976
How it's scored
39.7/42Issue resolution94% of issues closed
28.6/30PR acceptance296/311 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 6/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs296
open_issues7
closed_issues120
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.945
closed_unmerged_prs15
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
14.6/25Owner reach105 followers of PrinsFrank
25/25Track record91 public repos, account ~9 yr old
Inputs used
followers105
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginPrinsFrank
public_repos91
account_age_days3,474
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 33 days ago
20/20Version history37 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesprinsfrank/pdfparser
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish33

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

84Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.php-cs-fixer.php, phpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests30 out of 30 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
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics7 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsdocument-parser, parser, pdf, pdf-parser, pdf-reader, pdfparser, text-extraction
has_wikino
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?

67Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests30 out of 30 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
1.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 6/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 4 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
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 18 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file 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_aggregate6.7
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.

48Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.php-cs-fixer.php, phpstan.neon
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
5/8Automated maintenancedependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePHP without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/246 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes58,058
source_files_sampled246
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplessamples
Inputs used
example_dirssamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

163GitHub stars
6contributors
223commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
37releases
1bus factor
7open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.7 / 10
6.7aggregate

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 · 2026-07-15 20:05 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
4Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 6/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 18 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
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistprinsfrank/glyph-lists^1.0composer.json
All dependencies 11

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 10 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistprinsfrank/glyph-listsdirect
Packagistext-gdindirect
Packagistext-iconvindirect
Packagistext-zlibindirect
Packagistfriendsofphp/php-cs-fixerindirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan2.2.5indirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-deprecation-rulesindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-strict-rulesindirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunitindirect
Packagistsymfony/yamlindirect
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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsPackagist.