Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-18 01:56 UTC

consolidation / self-update

Symfony Console command to update a phar in place.

PHPMIT★ 103 stars⑂ 11 forkssince Aug 2018View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

consolidation/self-update holds a health index of 41 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (67/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (19/100). It was last updated 324 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

41
overall / 100
Weak

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.

41
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 44 is calibrated to 41 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

ConsolidationOrganization
16 followers21 public repossince Mar 2016

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Packagistconsolidation/self-update3.1.0554,45123324 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

29At Risk · 21% of overall
How it's scored
3.6/36Push recencylast push 324 days ago
0.7/36Commit cadence1/52 weeks with commits
2.7/18Commit volume1 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year1
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push324
active_weeks_last_year1
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases9 releases published
16.2/36Release recencylatest release 324 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~169.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count9
latest_release_tag3.1.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release324
mean_days_between_releases169.8
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
32.6/60Stars103 stars
8.3/25Forks11 forks
1.7/15Watchers3 watchers
Inputs used
forks11
stars103
watchers3
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
76.6/80Monthly downloads554,451 downloads/month across packagist
8.7/20Registry dependents19 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesconsolidation/self-update
dependents19
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads60,123,379
monthly_downloads554,451
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

67Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12.7/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 44% of commits
9.5/13.5Contributor breadth7 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled7
top_contributor_share0.435
How it's scored
30/42Issue resolution71% of issues closed
23.5/30PR acceptance18/23 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 3/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs18
open_issues4
closed_issues10
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.714
closed_unmerged_prs5
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
8.8/25Owner reach16 followers of consolidation
21.8/25Track record21 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers16
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginconsolidation
public_repos21
account_age_days3,851
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on packagist
26/35Publish recencylatest publish 324 days ago
20/20Version history23 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesconsolidation/self-update
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish324

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

34At Risk · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests1 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
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?

34At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
0/2.5CI-Tests1 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 3/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities14 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate2.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
12.6/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories2 affected: guzzlehttp/guzzle 7.9.2 (high 7.2), symfony/cache 7.2.0 (high 7.1)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
29.5/40No advisories left outstanding2 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 113 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories14
affected_packages3
assessed_packages24
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 2, moderate 1
direct_affected_packages2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 24 resolved dependencies against OSV. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. Reachability is not analyzed.

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.

19Critical · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
12.3/40Legible commit history23 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.23
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfilescomposer.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePHP without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/2 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes6,007
source_files_sampled2
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

103GitHub stars
7contributors
1commits, last 12 months
324days since last push
9releases
2bus factor
4open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 11 ⇿
0Stars
11Forks
9Releases

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.

0246810121112020-032023-052026-07
Major 1Minor 3Patch 3

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 2.8 / 10
2.8aggregate

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 · 2026-09-18 01:56 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
0CI-Tests1 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 3/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities14 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 5
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistguzzlehttp/guzzle^7.9composer.json
Packagistkevinrob/guzzle-cache-middleware^5.1 || ^6composer.json
Packagistsymfony/cache^5.4 || ^6.4 || ^7composer.json
Packagistsymfony/console^5.4 || ^6.4 || ^7composer.json
Packagistsymfony/filesystem^5.4 || ^6.4 || ^7composer.json
All dependencies 24

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 19 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistguzzlehttp/guzzle7.9.2direct
Packagistkevinrob/guzzle-cache-middleware6.0.0direct
Packagistsymfony/cache7.2.0direct
Packagistsymfony/console7.2.0direct
Packagistsymfony/filesystem7.2.0direct
Packagistcomposer/semver3.4.3indirect
Packagistguzzlehttp/promises2.0.4indirect
Packagistguzzlehttp/psr72.7.0indirect
Packagistpsr/cache3.0.0indirect
Packagistpsr/container2.0.2indirect
Packagistpsr/http-client1.0.3indirect
Packagistpsr/http-factory1.1.0indirect
Packagistpsr/http-message2.0indirect
Packagistpsr/log3.0.2indirect
Packagistralouphie/getallheaders3.0.3indirect
Packagistsymfony/cache-contracts3.5.1indirect
Packagistsymfony/deprecation-contracts3.5.1indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-ctype1.31.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-intl-grapheme1.31.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-intl-normalizer1.31.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-mbstring1.31.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/service-contracts3.5.1indirect
Packagistsymfony/string7.2.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/var-exporter7.2.0indirect
Dependency advisories 3

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 24 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 3 carry known advisories, of which 2 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
guzzlehttp/guzzle7.9.2directhigh98.0.1
symfony/cache7.2.0directhigh18.0.12
guzzlehttp/psr72.7.0indirectmoderate42.12.3

An advisory means the version recorded in the dependency graph falls inside an advisory’s affected range. Reachability is not analysed, and the graph includes development and test pins — a finding may concern tooling rather than shipped software.

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.