Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-24 12:16 UTC

joomla-framework / oauth2

Joomla Framework OAuth2 Package

PHPGPL-2.0★ 10 stars⑂ 11 forkssince Feb 2013View on GitHub ↗

joomla-framework/oauth2 holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (90/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (30/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts 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

Joomla! FrameworkOrganization
84 followers50 public repossince Dec 2013

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagistjoomla/oauth24.0.213,35622130 days agoframeworkoauth2joomla

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

57Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
1.4/36Commit cadence2/52 weeks with commits
8.6/18Commit volume8 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year8
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year2
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases9 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 127 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~167.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count9
latest_release_tag3.0.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release127
mean_days_between_releases167.1
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?

59Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
15.5/60Stars10 stars
8.3/25Forks11 forks
5.6/15Watchers11 watchers
Inputs used
forks11
stars10
watchers11
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (GPL-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges5
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, poser.pugx.org
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
55/80Monthly downloads13,356 downloads/month across packagist
4/20Registry dependents3 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesjoomla/oauth2
dependents3
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads360,161
monthly_downloads13,356
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

69Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 51% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth17 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled17
top_contributor_share0.509
How it's scored
36.8/42Issue resolution88% of issues closed
23.4/30PR acceptance25/32 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 6/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs25
open_issues1
closed_issues7
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.875
closed_unmerged_prs7
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 backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
13.9/25Owner reach84 followers of joomla-framework
24.4/25Track record50 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers84
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginjoomla-framework
public_repos50
account_age_days4,643

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 130 days ago
20/20Version history22 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesjoomla/oauth2
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish130

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

90Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configphpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
14/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests5 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://framework.joomla.org/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsphp, joomla, joomla-framework, oauth2
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://framework.joomla.org/
docs_sitehttps://framework.joomla.org/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

41Weak · 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
1.8/2.5CI-Tests5 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 6/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
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_aggregate4.1
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.

30At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
9.1/40Legible commit history17 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.17
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
55/55Manageable file sizes0/2 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes13,880
source_files_sampled2
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

10GitHub stars
17contributors
8commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
9releases
1bus factor
1open 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 ★ / 11 ⇿
0Stars
11Forks
3Releases

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.

0246810121112014-052019-102025-03
Major 1Minor 0Patch 2

Each point covers 10 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.1 / 10
4.1aggregate

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 · 2026-08-24 12:15 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
7CI-Tests5 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 6/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained1 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
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 5
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistjoomla/application^4.0composer.json
Packagistjoomla/http^4.0composer.json
Packagistjoomla/input^4.0composer.json
Packagistjoomla/session^4.0composer.json
Packagistjoomla/uri^4.0composer.json
All dependencies 10

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 5 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistjoomla/applicationdirect
Packagistjoomla/httpdirect
Packagistjoomla/inputdirect
Packagistjoomla/sessiondirect
Packagistjoomla/uridirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstanindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-deprecation-rulesindirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunitindirect
Packagistsquizlabs/php_codesnifferindirect
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 statisticsPackagist.