Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-15 03:18 UTC

flarum / subscriptions

[READ ONLY] Subtree split of Flarum subscriptions extension

PHP · TypeScriptMIT★ 13 stars⑂ 24 forkssince Jun 2015View on GitHub ↗

flarum/subscriptions holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (82/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (40/100). It was last updated 5 days ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

71
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.

71
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 63 is calibrated to 71 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

FlarumOrganization · verified domain
801 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/subscriptionsv2.0.0-rc.811,5704018 days agodiscussion

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

82Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 5 days ago
12.5/36Commit cadence — 18/52 weeks with commits
13.1/18Commit volume — 28 commits in the last year
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 10 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
commits_last_year28
human_commit_share0.98
days_since_last_push5
active_weeks_last_year18

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 39 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 18 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~23.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count39
latest_release_tagv2.0.0-rc.8
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release18
mean_days_between_releases23.3
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?

47Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
17.5/60Stars — 13 stars
11.3/25Forks — 24 forks
3.9/15Watchers — 6 watchers
Inputs used
forks24
stars13
watchers6
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
0/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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
54.2/80Monthly downloads — 11,570 downloads/month across packagist
7.4/20Registry dependents — 12 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesflarum/subscriptions
dependents12
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads477,234
monthly_downloads11,570
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

80Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor — 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
17.1/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 24% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 27 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 24 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled27
top_contributor_share0.241
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
23.4/30PR acceptance — 32/41 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs32
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs9
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
20.9/25Owner reach — 801 followers of flarum
24.6/25Track record — 53 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers801
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginflarum
public_repos53
account_age_days4,736

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 18 days ago
20/20Version history — 40 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesflarum/subscriptions
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish18

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

40Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — js/package.json ("prettier")
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

25At Risk
How it's scored
0/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://flarum.org
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://flarum.org
has_readmeno
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

57Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — no data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 24 contributing companies or organizations
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
6/7.5Maintained — 10 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
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_aggregate5.7
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.

58Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 94 of 98 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.959
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — js/package.json ("prettier")
11/11Static type checking — js/tsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
4/10Demonstrated agent practice — 2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 2 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsjs/tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0.02
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.02
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — PHP with type-check config (js/tsconfig.json)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/52 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes14,887
source_files_sampled52
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

13GitHub stars
27contributors
28commits, last 12 months
5days since last push
39releases
3bus factor
0open issues
npm, 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 ★ / 24 ⇿
0Stars
24Forks
21Releases

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.

048121620242422015-122020-042024-08
Major 1Minor 8Patch 3

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.7 / 10
5.7aggregate

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 · 2026-09-15 03:17 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 24 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
8Maintained10 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
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.8composer.json
All dependencies 12

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 11 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistflarum/core—direct
npm@flarum/prettier-config^1.0.0indirect
npmflarum-tsconfig^2.0.0indirect
npmflarum-webpack-config^3.0.0indirect
npmprettier^2.7.1indirect
npmtypescript^4.5.4indirect
npmtypescript-coverage-report^0.6.1indirect
npmwebpack^5.104.1indirect
npmwebpack-cli^4.10.0indirect
Packagistflarum/approval—indirect
Packagistflarum/markdown—indirect
Packagistflarum/testing—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.