Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-15 15:30 UTC

easybill / e-invoicing

A library for PHP to generate and read EN16931 conform structured XML data with the syntaxes of UBL and CII.

XSLT · PHPMIT★ 14 stars⑂ 2 forkssince Jun 2024View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined
#e-invoice#e-invoicing#en16931#factur-x#peppol#peppol-bis#xrechnung#cii#ubl

easybill/e-invoicing holds a health index of 60 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (74/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (40/100). It was last updated 22 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

60
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.

60
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 57 is calibrated to 60 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

easybill GmbHOrganization
12 followers30 public repossince Feb 2013

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagisteasybill/e-invoicing0.3.210,6439427 days agoxmlinvoicingeinvoicezugferdciiuble-invoicingfactur-xpeppolxrechnungen16931

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

63Moderate · 21% of overall

Development activity

59Moderate
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 22 days ago
15.2/36Commit cadence — 22/52 weeks with commits
15.3/18Commit volume — 50 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year50
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push22
active_weeks_last_year22

Release discipline

68Good
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 9 releases published
7.2/36Release recency — latest release 427 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~40.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count9
latest_release_tag0.3.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release427
mean_days_between_releases40.1
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?

40Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

22At Risk
How it's scored
18.1/60Stars — 14 stars
0/25Forks — 2 forks
3.9/15Watchers — 6 watchers
Inputs used
forks2
stars14
watchers6
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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_badges—
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

54Moderate
How it's scored
53.7/80Monthly downloads — 10,643 downloads/month across packagist
0/20Registry dependents — 0 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packageseasybill/e-invoicing
dependents0
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads162,965
monthly_downloads10,643
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

60Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

26At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
8.8/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 61% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 4 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.608

Issue & PR responsiveness

68Good
How it's scored
25.2/42Issue resolution — 60% of issues closed
23.8/30PR acceptance — 61/77 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — no data
Inputs used
merged_prs61
open_issues2
closed_issues3
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.6
closed_unmerged_prs16
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, OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

76Good
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
8/25Owner reach — 12 followers of easybill
22.9/25Track record — 30 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers12
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified—
owner_logineasybill
public_repos30
account_age_days4,885
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

79Good
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
14/35Publish recency — latest publish 427 days ago
20/20Version history — 9 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageseasybill/e-invoicing
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish427

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

74Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

84Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .php-cs-fixer.dist.php, phpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 9 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicse-invoice, e-invoicing, en16931, factur-x, peppol, peppol-bis, xrechnung, cii, ubl
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?

41Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

41Weak
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0.8/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — no data
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — 0 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
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
3.8/7.5Vulnerabilities — 5 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Code-Review, 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.

70Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

75Good
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes6,558
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

60Moderate
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .php-cs-fixer.dist.php, phpstan.neon
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilescomposer.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — XSLT without a type-check config
54.6/55Manageable file sizes — 1/145 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageXSLT
largest_source_bytes111,230
source_files_sampled145
oversized_source_files1

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
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 — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
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

14GitHub stars
4contributors
50commits, last 12 months
22days since last push
9releases
1bus factor
2open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.0 / 10
4.0aggregate

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 · 2026-07-15 15:30 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
1Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
n/aCode-ReviewFound no human activity in the last 30 changesets
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate 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
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
5Vulnerabilities5 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistjms/serializer^3.30composer.json
All dependencies 74

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 73 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistjms/serializer3.32.7direct
Packagistclue/ndjson-react1.3.0indirect
Packagistcomposer/pcre3.3.2indirect
Packagistcomposer/semver3.4.4indirect
Packagistcomposer/xdebug-handler3.0.5indirect
Packagistdoctrine/instantiator2.0.0indirect
Packagistdoctrine/lexer3.0.1indirect
Packagistevenement/evenement3.0.2indirect
Packagistfidry/cpu-core-counter1.3.0indirect
Packagistfriendsofphp/php-cs-fixer3.94.2indirect
Packagistguzzlehttp/guzzle7.10.0indirect
Packagistguzzlehttp/promises2.3.0indirect
Packagistguzzlehttp/psr72.9.0indirect
Packagistjms/metadata2.9.0indirect
Packagistmyclabs/deep-copy1.13.4indirect
Packagistnikic/php-parser5.7.0indirect
Packagistphar-io/manifest2.0.4indirect
Packagistphar-io/version3.2.1indirect
Packagistphpstan/phpdoc-parser2.3.2indirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan2.1.44indirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-strict-rules2.0.10indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-code-coverage12.5.3indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-file-iterator6.0.1indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-invoker6.0.0indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-text-template5.0.0indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-timer8.0.0indirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunit12.5.8indirect
Packagistpsr/container2.0.2indirect
Packagistpsr/event-dispatcher1.0.0indirect
Packagistpsr/http-client1.0.3indirect
Packagistpsr/http-factory1.1.0indirect
Packagistpsr/http-message2.0indirect
Packagistpsr/log3.0.2indirect
Packagistralouphie/getallheaders3.0.3indirect
Packagistreact/cache1.2.0indirect
Packagistreact/child-process0.6.7indirect
Packagistreact/dns1.14.0indirect
Packagistreact/event-loop1.6.0indirect
Packagistreact/promise3.3.0indirect
Packagistreact/socket1.17.0indirect
Packagistreact/stream1.4.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/cli-parser4.2.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/comparator7.1.4indirect
Packagistsebastian/complexity5.0.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/diff7.0.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/environment8.0.4indirect
Packagistsebastian/exporter7.0.2indirect
Packagistsebastian/global-state8.0.2indirect
Packagistsebastian/lines-of-code4.0.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/object-enumerator7.0.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/object-reflector5.0.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/recursion-context7.0.1indirect
Packagistsebastian/type6.0.3indirect
Packagistsebastian/version6.0.0indirect
Packagiststaabm/side-effects-detector1.0.5indirect
Packagistsymfony/console7.4.7indirect
Packagistsymfony/deprecation-contracts3.6.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/event-dispatcher7.4.4indirect
Packagistsymfony/event-dispatcher-contracts3.6.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/filesystem7.4.6indirect
Packagistsymfony/finder7.4.6indirect
Packagistsymfony/options-resolver7.4.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-ctype1.33.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-intl-grapheme1.33.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-intl-normalizer1.33.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-mbstring1.33.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-php801.33.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-php811.33.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-php841.33.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/process7.4.5indirect
Packagistsymfony/service-contracts3.6.1indirect
Packagistsymfony/stopwatch7.4.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/string7.4.6indirect
Packagisttheseer/tokenizer2.0.1indirect
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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with easybill/e-invoicing. Read them side by side →

86gflohr/e-invoice-eu🇪🇺 💶 Generate e-invoices (E-Rechnung in German) conforming to EN16931 (Factur-X/ZUGFeRD, UBL, CII, XRechnung aka X-Rechnung) from LibreOffice Calc/Excel data or JSON.Excellent78num-num/ubl-invoiceA modern object-oriented PHP library to read and create valid UBL and Peppol BIS filesGood65horstoeko/zugferdublbridgeZUGFeRD/Factur-X to UBL BridgeGood48dotwavehq/go-einvoiceGerman E-Invoice (E-Rechnung) library for Go — generate EN 16931 / XRechnung 3.0 CII XML and ZUGFeRD / Factur-X PDFs.Weak73phax/phive-rulesA set of preconfigured rules for the phive engineGood87horstoeko/zugferdZUGFeRD/XRechnung/Factur-X LibraryExcellent

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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — Packagist.