Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-08 18:35 UTC

ibexa / jms-translation-bundle

Puts the Symfony2 Translation Component on steroids

PHPNo license detected★ 0 stars⑂ 1 forksince Feb 2025forkView on GitHub ↗
KindPluginNetwork serviceCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

ibexa/jms-translation-bundle holds a health index of 50 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (71/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (1/100). It was last updated 6 days ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

50
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.

50
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 50 is calibrated to 50 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

IbexaOrganization
40 followers100 public repossince May 2020

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

69Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 6 days ago
4.2/36Commit cadence6/52 weeks with commits
10/18Commit volume12 commits in the last year
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
commits_last_year12
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push6
active_weeks_last_year6
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases3 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 6 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~84.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count3
latest_release_tag2.6.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release6
mean_days_between_releases84.4
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?

1Critical · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars0 stars
0/25Forks1 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars0
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
0/22.5README
0/22.5Licenseno license file detected
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeno
has_licenseno
readme_badges1
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicestravis-ci.org
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

71Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
16.7/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 26% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth80 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 40 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled80
top_contributor_share0.259
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolutionno issues or no data
25/30PR acceptance5/6 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance4/4 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 5/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs5
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d4
prs_decided_30d4
issue_closed_ratio
closed_unmerged_prs1
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d4
first_time_prs_decided_30d4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
11.6/25Owner reach40 followers of ibexa
25/25Track record100 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers40
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginibexa
public_repos100
account_age_days2,304

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

56Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configphpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests5 out of 5 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

15Critical
How it's scored
0/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttp://jmsyst.com/bundles/JMSTranslationBundle
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikino
homepagehttp://jmsyst.com/bundles/JMSTranslationBundle
docs_sitehttp://jmsyst.com/bundles/JMSTranslationBundle
has_readmeno
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionno

Security

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

42Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests5 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 5/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 40 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
0/2.5Licenselicense file not detected
2.2/7.5Maintained4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
4.5/5Security-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_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.

41Weak · 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 history82 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.82
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configphpstan.neon
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePHP without a type-check config
54.6/55Manageable file sizes1/139 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes97,362
source_files_sampled139
oversized_source_files1
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
0/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examplescookbook
Inputs used
example_dirscookbook
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

0GitHub stars
80contributors
12commits, last 12 months
6days since last push
3releases
3bus factor
0open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Community profile unavailable
  • Could not fetch packagist package 'ibexa/translation-bundle' from its registry
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

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 · 2026-09-08 18:35 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests5 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 5/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10Contributorsproject has 40 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
0Licenselicense file not detected
3Maintained4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
9Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 9
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistnikic/php-parser^5composer.json
Packagistsymfony/console^5.4 || ^6.4 || ^7.1composer.json
Packagistsymfony/framework-bundle^5.4 || ^6.4 || ^7.1composer.json
Packagistsymfony/config^5.4 || ^6.4 || ^7.1composer.json
Packagistsymfony/translation^5.4 || ^6.4 || ^7.1composer.json
Packagistsymfony/translation-contracts^2.0 || ^3.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/validator^5.4 || ^6.4 || ^7.1composer.json
Packagisttwig/twig^3.17composer.json
Packagistpsr/log^1.0 || ^2.0 || ^3.0composer.json
All dependencies 26

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 9 direct and 17 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistnikic/php-parserdirect
Packagistpsr/logdirect
Packagistsymfony/configdirect
Packagistsymfony/consoledirect
Packagistsymfony/framework-bundledirect
Packagistsymfony/translationdirect
Packagistsymfony/translation-contractsdirect
Packagistsymfony/validatordirect
Packagisttwig/twigdirect
Packagistdoctrine/annotationsindirect
Packagistdoctrine/coding-standardindirect
Packagistmatthiasnoback/symfony-dependency-injection-testindirect
Packagistnyholm/nsaindirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstanindirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunitindirect
Packagistsymfony/assetindirect
Packagistsymfony/browser-kitindirect
Packagistsymfony/css-selectorindirect
Packagistsymfony/filesystemindirect
Packagistsymfony/formindirect
Packagistsymfony/phpunit-bridgeindirect
Packagistsymfony/property-accessindirect
Packagistsymfony/routingindirect
Packagistsymfony/security-csrfindirect
Packagistsymfony/twig-bundleindirect
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.