Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-26 12:40 UTC

contributte / nusoap

:smirk: Fixed NuSOAP for PHP 5.6 - 8.5

PHPNo license detected★ 336 stars⑂ 357 forkssince Mar 2016View on GitHub ↗

contributte/nusoap holds a health index of 75 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (88/100) and lowest on Security (44/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

75
overall / 100
Good

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.

75
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 65 is calibrated to 75 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

ContributteOrganization
38 followers237 public repossince Oct 2016

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagisteconea/nusoapv0.9.20108,47820438 days agophpxmlhttpclientsoaptransportnusoap

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

54Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence — 8/52 weeks with commits
13.8/18Commit volume — 33 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year33
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year8
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 18 releases published
7.2/36Release recency — latest release 397 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~186 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count18
latest_release_tagv0.9.20
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release397
mean_days_between_releases186
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?

68Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
41/60Stars — 336 stars
21.3/25Forks — 357 forks
7.6/15Watchers — 24 watchers
Inputs used
forks357
stars336
watchers24
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
0/22.5License — no license file detected
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseno
readme_badges5
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesbadgen.net
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
67.1/80Monthly downloads — 108,478 downloads/month across packagist
10.4/20Registry dependents — 35 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packageseconea/nusoap
dependents35
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads6,045,754
monthly_downloads108,478
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

70Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
14.8/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 34% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 43 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled43
top_contributor_share0.341
How it's scored
28.6/42Issue resolution — 68% of issues closed
26.2/30PR acceptance — 69/79 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
7.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 7/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
merged_prs69
open_issues24
closed_issues51
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.68
closed_unmerged_prs10
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
11.4/25Owner reach — 38 followers of contributte
25/25Track record — 237 public repos, account ~9 yr old
Inputs used
followers38
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_logincontributte
public_repos237
account_age_days3,640
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
14/35Publish recency — latest publish 438 days ago
20/20Version history — 20 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageseconea/nusoap
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish438

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

88Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — phpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 11 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://contributte.github.io/nusoap/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsnusoap, soap, php, http, library
has_wikino
homepagehttps://contributte.github.io/nusoap/
docs_sitehttps://contributte.github.io/nusoap/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

44Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2/2.5CI-Tests — 11 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 7/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
0/2.5License — license file not detected
0/7.5Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
4.5/5Security-Policy — security policy file 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_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate4.4
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.

51Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
18.7/40Legible commit history — 35 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.35
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — phpstan.neon
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_filesMakefile
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 code — PHP without a type-check config
53.2/55Manageable file sizes — 1/31 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes363,916
source_files_sampled31
oversized_source_files1
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — samples
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

336GitHub stars
43contributors
33commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
18releases
2bus factor
24open 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 ★ / 357 ⇿
0Stars
357Forks
18Releases

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.

012525037535572016-092021-092026-09
Major 0Minor 0Patch 15

Each point covers 10 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.4 / 10
4.4aggregate

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 · 2026-09-26 12:40 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
8CI-Tests11 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5Code-ReviewFound 7/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
10Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
0Licenselicense file not detected
0Maintained1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
9Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 8

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 8 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistcontributte/phpstan—indirect
Packagistcontributte/qa—indirect
Packagistcontributte/tester—indirect
Packagistext-curl—indirect
Packagistext-json—indirect
Packagistext-xml—indirect
Packagistext-zlib—indirect
Packagistphp—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.