Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-13 06:27 UTC

friendsoftwig / twigcs

The missing checkstyle for twig!

PHPMIT★ 360 stars⑂ 35 forkssince Oct 2015View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

friendsoftwig/twigcs holds a health index of 63 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (75/100) and lowest on Vitality (32/100). It was last updated 232 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

63
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.

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

Ownership

Friends of TwigOrganization
6 followers1 public reposince May 2019

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Packagistfriendsoftwig/twigcsv6.6.1151,14732232 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

32At Risk · 21% of overall
How it's scored
3.6/36Push recency — last push 232 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence — 3/52 weeks with commits
5.4/18Commit volume — 3 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_year3
human_commit_share0.58
days_since_last_push232
active_weeks_last_year3
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 27 releases published
16.2/36Release recency — latest release 232 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~151.8 days
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — 2 out of the last 2 releases have a total of 2 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count27
latest_release_tagv6.6.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release232
mean_days_between_releases151.8

Community & Adoption

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

75Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
41.4/60Stars — 360 stars
12.8/25Forks — 35 forks
8.4/15Watchers — 33 watchers
Inputs used
forks35
stars360
watchers33
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
7.2/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges5
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicescodecov.io, github.com, poser.pugx.org
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
69.1/80Monthly downloads — 151,147 downloads/month across packagist
12/20Registry dependents — 63 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesfriendsoftwig/twigcs
dependents63
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads6,945,600
monthly_downloads151,147
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

68Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12.6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 44% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 29 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 29 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled29
top_contributor_share0.441
How it's scored
33.8/42Issue resolution — 80% of issues closed
26.9/30PR acceptance — 214/239 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 5/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs214
open_issues22
closed_issues91
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.805
closed_unmerged_prs25
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
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
6.1/25Owner reach — 6 followers of friendsoftwig
14.2/25Track record — 1 public repos, account ~7 yr old
Inputs used
followers6
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginfriendsoftwig
public_repos1
account_age_days2,663
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
26/35Publish recency — latest publish 232 days ago
20/20Version history — 32 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesfriendsoftwig/twigcs
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish232

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

73Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .php-cs-fixer.dist.php, phpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
2/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 3 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsphp, library, composer, twig, checkstyle
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

52Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
0.2/2.5CI-Tests — 3 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3/7.5Code-Review — Found 5/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 29 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
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
6/7.5Signed-Releases — 2 out of the last 2 releases have a total of 2 signed artifacts.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate5.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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.

46Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
14.7/40Legible commit history — 16 of 58 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.276
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .php-cs-fixer.dist.php, phpstan.neon
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 42 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_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.42
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
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/83 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes41,946
source_files_sampled83
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

360GitHub stars
29contributors
3commits, last 12 months
232days since last push
27releases
2bus factor
22open 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 ★ / 35 ⇿
0Stars
35Forks
26Releases

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.

01325383412017-062021-102026-01
Major 4Minor 12Patch 6

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.2 / 10
5.2aggregate

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 · 2026-09-13 06:26 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
1CI-Tests3 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4Code-ReviewFound 5/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
10Contributorsproject has 29 contributing companies or organizations
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
8Signed-Releases2 out of the last 2 releases have a total of 2 signed artifacts.
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistsymfony/console^4.4 || ^5.3 || ^6.0 || ^7.0 || ^8.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/filesystem^4.4 || ^5.3 || ^6.0 || ^7.0 || ^8.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/finder^4.4 || ^5.3 || ^6.0 || ^7.0 || ^8.0composer.json
All dependencies 11

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 8 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistsymfony/console—direct
Packagistsymfony/filesystem—direct
Packagistsymfony/finder—direct
Packagistext-ctype—indirect
Packagistext-hash—indirect
Packagistext-json—indirect
Packagistext-mbstring—indirect
Packagistext-simplexml—indirect
Packagistphp—indirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunit—indirect
Packagistsymfony/phpunit-bridge—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.