Public record
Software health reportschema 0.15.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-19 16:38 UTC

ghostwriter / container

Provides an extensible Dependency Injection Service Container for Automated Object Composition, Interception, and Lifetime Management.

PHPBSD-3-Clause★ 1 star⑂ 0 forkssince Nov 2021View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined
#container#ghostwriter#psr-11#dependency-injection#php#service-container

ghostwriter/container holds a health index of 69 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (94/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (32/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

69
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.

69
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 62 is calibrated to 69 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Nathanael EsayeasPersonal account
44 followers74 public repossince Nov 2014@GhostCI

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
Packagistghostwriter/container7.0.2198,0324153 days agocontainerghostwriter

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

94Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

95Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
31.2/36Commit cadence — 45/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 1,259 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year1,259
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year45

Release discipline

92Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 41 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 53 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~53.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count41
latest_release_tag7.0.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release53
mean_days_between_releases53.2
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?

50Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

1Critical
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 1 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars1
watchers1
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 (BSD-3-Clause)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

80Excellent
How it's scored
70.6/80Monthly downloads — 198,032 downloads/month across packagist
9.6/20Registry dependents — 27 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesghostwriter/container
dependents27
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads6,826,241
monthly_downloads198,032
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

62Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

20At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 10 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1

Issue & PR responsiveness

83Excellent
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
29.9/30PR acceptance — 1,097/1,099 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs1,097
open_issues0
closed_issues9
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs2
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. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

59Moderate
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
11.9/25Owner reach — 44 followers of ghostwriter
25/25Track record — 74 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers44
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginghostwriter
public_repos74
account_age_days4,264
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 53 days ago
20/20Version history — 41 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesghostwriter/container
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish53

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

58Moderate · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

54Moderate
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

65Good
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://github.com/ghostwriter/container
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscontainer, ghostwriter, psr-11, dependency-injection, php, service-container
has_wikino
homepagehttps://github.com/ghostwriter/container
docs_sitehttps://github.com/ghostwriter/container
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

42Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

42Weak
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 10 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate4.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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.

32At Risk · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
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_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

46Weak
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — 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_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
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 — PHP without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/111 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes26,604
source_files_sampled111
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

1GitHub stars
1contributors
1,259commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
41releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.2 / 10
4.2aggregate

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 · 2026-07-19 16:38 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 11 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 0/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistpsr/container^2.0.2composer.json
All dependencies 32

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 31 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistpsr/container2.0.2direct
Packagistghostwriter/coding-standard—indirect
Packagistghostwriter/phpunit-assertions0.1.0indirect
Packagisthamcrest/hamcrest-php2.1.1indirect
Packagistmockery/mockery1.6.12indirect
Packagistmyclabs/deep-copy1.13.4indirect
Packagistnikic/php-parser5.8.0indirect
Packagistphar-io/manifest2.0.4indirect
Packagistphar-io/version3.2.1indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-code-coverage14.2.3indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-file-iterator7.0.0indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-invoker7.0.0indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-text-template6.0.0indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-timer9.0.0indirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunit13.2.4indirect
Packagistsebastian/cli-parser5.0.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/comparator8.3.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/complexity6.0.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/diff9.0.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/environment9.3.2indirect
Packagistsebastian/exporter8.1.1indirect
Packagistsebastian/file-filter1.0.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/git-state1.0.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/global-state9.0.1indirect
Packagistsebastian/lines-of-code5.0.2indirect
Packagistsebastian/object-enumerator8.0.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/object-reflector6.0.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/recursion-context8.0.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/type7.0.1indirect
Packagistsebastian/version7.0.0indirect
Packagiststaabm/side-effects-detector1.0.5indirect
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 ghostwriter/container. Read them side by side →

99taskforcesh/bullmqBullMQ - Message Queue and Batch processing for NodeJS, Python, .NET, Elixir, Rust and PHP based on Redis or PostgreSQLExceptional98infection/infectionPHP Mutation Testing libraryExceptional98symfony/symfonyThe Symfony PHP frameworkExceptional98line/line-bot-sdk-phpLINE Messaging API SDK for PHPExceptional98Sylius/SyliusHeadless open-source eCommerce platform on top of PHP/Symfony/API PlatformExceptional98api-platform/coreThe server component of API Platform: hypermedia and GraphQL APIs in minutesExceptional

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 v0.15.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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