Public record
Software health reportschema 0.26.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-22 08:54 UTC

TYPO3 / testing-framework

TYPO3 testing framework for core and extensions

PHPGPL-2.0★ 67 stars⑂ 51 forkssince Feb 2017View on GitHub ↗

TYPO3/testing-framework holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (76/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (41/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

80
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.

80
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

116 followers23 public repossince May 2009

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagisttypo3/testing-framework9.5.0162,500212118 days agotestingteststypo3

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

72Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
11.1/36Commit cadence16/52 weeks with commits
13.3/18Commit volume29 commits in the last year
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained5 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
commits_last_year29
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year16
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases83 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 117 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~53.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count83
latest_release_tag9.5.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release117
mean_days_between_releases53.1
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?

67Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
29.5/60Stars67 stars
14.2/25Forks51 forks
7.1/15Watchers20 watchers
Inputs used
forks51
stars67
watchers20
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonbelow_threshold
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (GPL-2.0)
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
69.5/80Monthly downloads162,500 downloads/month across packagist
19.6/20Registry dependents862 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagestypo3/testing-framework
dependents862
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads5,576,915
monthly_downloads162,500
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
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11.2/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 50% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth47 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 26 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled47
top_contributor_share0.503
How it's scored
39.1/42Issue resolution93% of issues closed
27.1/30PR acceptance546/604 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
10.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 21/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
merged_prs546
open_issues8
closed_issues109
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.932
closed_unmerged_prs58
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
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
14.9/25Owner reach116 followers of TYPO3
22.1/25Track record23 public repos, account ~17 yr old
Inputs used
followers116
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginTYPO3
public_repos23
account_age_days6,265
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 118 days ago
20/20Version history212 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagestypo3/testing-framework
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish118

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

73Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configphpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests28 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicstypo3, tests, testsuite, test-framework
has_wikino
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

50Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.2/2.5CI-Tests28 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 21/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 26 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
3.8/7.5Maintained5 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
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
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.

41Weak · 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 history89 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.89
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configphpstan.neon
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
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
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 sizes0/63 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes50,323
source_files_sampled63
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

67GitHub stars
47contributors
29commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
83releases
1bus factor
8open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 67 ★ / 51 ⇿
67Stars
51Forks
83Releases

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.

0132538506375675132017-032021-102026-06
Major 2Minor 22Patch 58

Each point covers 9 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.0 / 10
5.0aggregate

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 · 2026-07-22 08:53 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
9CI-Tests28 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7Code-ReviewFound 21/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
10Contributorsproject has 26 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
5Maintained5 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
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 7
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistguzzlehttp/psr7^2.5.0composer.json
Packagistpsr/container^2.0composer.json
Packagisttypo3/cms-backend14.*.*@dev || 15.*.*@devcomposer.json
Packagisttypo3/cms-core14.*.*@dev || 15.*.*@devcomposer.json
Packagisttypo3/cms-extbase14.*.*@dev || 15.*.*@devcomposer.json
Packagisttypo3/cms-fluid14.*.*@dev || 15.*.*@devcomposer.json
Packagisttypo3/cms-frontend14.*.*@dev || 15.*.*@devcomposer.json
All dependencies 19

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 12 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistguzzlehttp/psr7direct
Packagistpsr/containerdirect
Packagisttypo3/cms-backenddirect
Packagisttypo3/cms-coredirect
Packagisttypo3/cms-extbasedirect
Packagisttypo3/cms-fluiddirect
Packagisttypo3/cms-frontenddirect
Packagistcomposer/class-map-generatorindirect
Packagistfriendsofphp/php-cs-fixerindirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstanindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-phpunitindirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunitindirect
Packagisttypo3/cms-workspacesindirect
Packagisttypo3/testing-framework-package-0indirect
Packagisttypo3/testing-framework-package-1indirect
Packagisttypo3/testing-framework-package-unsynced-extemconfindirect
Packagisttypo3/testing-framework-package-with-extemconfindirect
Packagisttypo3/testing-framework-package2-unsynced-extemconfindirect
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 v0.26.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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