Public record
Software health reportschema 0.27.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-31 23:53 UTC

flarum / messages

PHP · TypeScriptMIT★ 0 stars⑂ 1 forksince Sep 2024View on GitHub ↗

flarum/messages holds a health index of 53 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (79/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (27/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

53
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.

53
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 52 is calibrated to 53 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

FlarumOrganization
798 followers53 public repossince Sep 2013

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagistflarum/messagesv2.0.0-rc.52,0531323 days agoflarum

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

79Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
14.5/36Commit cadence21/52 weeks with commits
13.5/18Commit volume31 commits in the last year
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained8 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
commits_last_year31
human_commit_share0.986
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year21
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases12 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 23 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~48 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count12
latest_release_tagv2.0.0-rc.5
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release23
mean_days_between_releases48
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?

31At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars0 stars
0/25Forks1 forks
2.7/15Watchers4 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars0
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
0/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeno
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
44.2/80Monthly downloads2,053 downloads/month across packagist
4/20Registry dependents3 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesflarum/messages
dependents3
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads12,354
monthly_downloads2,053
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

61Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
13.9/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 38% of commits
6.8/13.5Contributor breadth5 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled5
top_contributor_share0.382
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolutionno issues or no data
0/30PR acceptanceno decided pull requests or no data
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs0
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, PR acceptance, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
20.9/25Owner reach798 followers of flarum
24.6/25Track record53 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers798
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginflarum
public_repos53
account_age_days4,691
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 23 days ago
20/20Version history13 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesflarum/messages
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish23

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

27At Risk · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

10Critical
How it's scored
0/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeno
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionno

Security

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

55Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Testsno data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
4.5/7.5Maintained8 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTno SAST tool detected
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file 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_aggregate5.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, 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.

54Moderate · 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 history68 of 68 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingjs/tsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
8.7/10Demonstrated agent practice3 of the last 69 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance1 of the last 69 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configsjs/tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0.043
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.014
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codePHP with type-check config (js/tsconfig.json)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/100 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes10,513
source_files_sampled100
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

0GitHub stars
5contributors
31commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
12releases
2bus factor
0open issues
npm, Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.5 / 10
5.5aggregate

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 · 2026-07-31 23:53 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
6Maintained8 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTno SAST tool detected
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistflarum/core^2.0.0-rc.5composer.json
All dependencies 11

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 10 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistflarum/coredirect
npm@flarum/jest-config^2.0.0indirect
npm@flarum/prettier-config^1.0.0indirect
npmflarum-tsconfig^2.0.0indirect
npmflarum-webpack-config^3.0.0indirect
npmprettier^2.5.1indirect
npmtypescript^4.5.4indirect
npmtypescript-coverage-report^0.6.1indirect
npmwebpack^5.104.1indirect
npmwebpack-cli^4.9.1indirect
Packagistflarum/testingindirect
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 v0.27.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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