Public record
Software health reportschema 0.23.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-21 17:59 UTC

PrinsFrank / standards

A collection of standards as PHP Enums: ISO3166, ISO4217, ISO639...

PHPMIT★ 483 stars⑂ 17 forkssince Jun 2022View on GitHub ↗

PrinsFrank/standards holds a health index of 83 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (86/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (44/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

83
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.

83
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 70 is calibrated to 83 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/standardsv3.16.562,4686440 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

86Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
14.5/36Commit cadence21/52 weeks with commits
15.9/18Commit volume58 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained13 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year58
human_commit_share0.47
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year21

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases64 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 38 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~26.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count64
latest_release_tagv3.16.5
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release38
mean_days_between_releases26.4
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?

64Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
43.5/60Stars483 stars
10/25Forks17 forks
0/15Watchers2 watchers
Inputs used
forks17
stars483
watchers2
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100
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
63.9/80Monthly downloads62,468 downloads/month across packagist
8.2/20Registry dependents16 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesprinsfrank/standards
dependents16
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads943,966
monthly_downloads62,468
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

65Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2.9/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 87% of commits
12.2/13.5Contributor breadth9 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 7 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled9
top_contributor_share0.871
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
23.9/30PR acceptance287/360 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 2/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs287
open_issues0
closed_issues28
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs73
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_days3,480
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 40 days ago
20/20Version history64 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesprinsfrank/standards
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish40

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

78Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows18 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.php-cs-fixer.php, phpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
10/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests16 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
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
topicsiso639, iso639-1, iso639-2, iso3166, iso3166-1, iso4217, standards
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?

59Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
1.2/2.5CI-Tests16 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 2/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 7 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
7.5/7.5Maintained13 commit(s) and 0 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
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_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate5.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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.

44Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
36.3/40Legible commit history32 of 47 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.681
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.php, phpstan.neon
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance7 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_share0.07
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
53.9/55Manageable file sizes3/151 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes701,411
source_files_sampled151
oversized_source_files3

Key facts

483GitHub stars
9contributors
58commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
64releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 483 ★ / 17 ⇿
483Stars
17Forks
64Releases

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.

0100200300400500483171142022-062024-062026-07
Major 3Minor 26Patch 34

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.9 / 10
5.9aggregate

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 · 2026-07-21 17:59 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
5CI-Tests16 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 2/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10Contributorsproject has 7 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained13 commit(s) and 0 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
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistprinsfrank/enums^1.4composer.json
All dependencies 15

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 14 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistprinsfrank/enumsdirect
Packagistcomposer/composerindirect
Packagistdbrekelmans/bdiindirect
Packagistext-domindirect
Packagistext-intlindirect
Packagistext-mbstringindirect
Packagistfriendsofphp/php-cs-fixerindirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstanindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-strict-rulesindirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunitindirect
Packagistprinsfrank/pdfparserindirect
Packagistprinsfrank/phpstan-doc-code-analyzerindirect
Packagistprinsfrank/transliterationindirect
Packagistsymfony/pantherindirect
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 v0.23.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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