Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-22 20:40 UTC

dg / ftp-deployment

A tool for automated deployment of web applications to an FTP server.

PHPCustom license★ 617 stars⑂ 88 forkssince Sep 2012View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolhow this is determined

dg/ftp-deployment holds a health index of 59 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (74/100) and lowest on Security (29/100). It was last updated 40 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

59
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

59
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 56 is calibrated to 59 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

David GrudlPersonal account
801 followers32 public repossince Feb 2010Nette Foundation

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 publishTags
Packagistdg/ftp-deploymentv3.7.02,00937135 days agosshftpdeployment

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

50Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 40 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence8/52 weeks with commits
12.1/18Commit volume21 commits in the last year
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
commits_last_year21
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push40
active_weeks_last_year8
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases36 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 135 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~202.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count36
latest_release_tagv3.7.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release135
mean_days_between_releases202.3

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

59Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
45.3/60Stars617 stars
16.2/25Forks88 forks
9.4/15Watchers51 watchers
Inputs used
forks88
stars617
watchers51
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5Licenselicense file present, not a recognized license
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, poser.pugx.org, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
44/80Monthly downloads2,009 downloads/month across packagist
7.4/20Registry dependents12 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesdg/ftp-deployment
dependents12
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads856,805
monthly_downloads2,009
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

63Moderate · 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
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth26 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 11 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled26
top_contributor_share0.869
How it's scored
36.7/42Issue resolution87% of issues closed
16.1/30PR acceptance36/67 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 1/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs36
open_issues14
closed_issues96
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.873
closed_unmerged_prs31
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
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
20.9/25Owner reach801 followers of dg
23.1/25Track record32 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers801
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_logindg
public_repos32
account_age_days6,044
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 135 days ago
20/20Version history37 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesdg/ftp-deployment
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish135

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

74Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configphpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://nette.org
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicssynchronization, php, ftp, ssh
has_wikino
homepagehttps://nette.org
docs_sitehttps://nette.org
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

29At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0.8/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 1 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
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 1/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 11 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5Licenselicense file detected
2.2/7.5Maintained4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
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-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated14
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive4
scorecard_aggregate2.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, 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.

55Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)llms.txt served by the project website (https://nette.org/llms.txt)
18.7/40Legible commit history35 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://nette.org/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.35
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes3,669
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 sizes0/25 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes17,345
source_files_sampled25
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

617GitHub stars
26contributors
21commits, last 12 months
40days since last push
36releases
1bus factor
14open 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 ★ / 88 ⇿
0Stars
88Forks
34Releases

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.

0204060801008742012-092018-122025-03
Major 3Minor 20Patch 11

Each point covers 12 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 2.9 / 10
2.9aggregate

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 · 2026-08-22 20:40 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
1Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 1/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 11 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
3Maintained4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
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
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistnette/command-line^1.9.2composer.json
All dependencies 8

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 7 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistnette/command-linedirect
Packagistext-zlibindirect
Packagistnette/phpstan-rulesindirect
Packagistnette/testerindirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistphpseclib/phpseclibindirect
Packagistphpstan/extension-installerindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstanindirect
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 statisticsPackagist.