Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-01 02:38 UTC

l4nos / laravel-cashier-stripe-connect

💲 Adds Stripe Connect functionality to Laravel's main billing package, Cashier. Simply works as a drop-in on top of Cashier, with no extra configuration.

PHPMIT★ 84 stars⑂ 43 forkssince Aug 2022View on GitHub ↗

l4nos/laravel-cashier-stripe-connect holds a health index of 45 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (65/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (20/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

45
overall / 100
Weak

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.

45
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 47 is calibrated to 45 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

RobPersonal account
7 followers33 public repossince Sep 2017In a dark room somewhere

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
Packagistlanos/laravel-cashier-stripe-connectv1.3.211,61621218 days agostripelaravelbillingstripe-connect

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

58Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
4.2/36Commit cadence6/52 weeks with commits
10.3/18Commit volume13 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_year13
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year6
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases4 releases published
16.2/36Release recencylatest release 218 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~109 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count4
latest_release_tagv1.3.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release218
mean_days_between_releases109
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?

49Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
31.1/60Stars84 stars
13.5/25Forks43 forks
1.7/15Watchers3 watchers
Inputs used
forks43
stars84
watchers3
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
54.2/80Monthly downloads11,616 downloads/month across packagist
0/20Registry dependents0 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packageslanos/laravel-cashier-stripe-connect
dependents0
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads185,379
monthly_downloads11,616
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

65Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 44% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth19 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled19
top_contributor_share0.442
How it's scored
37.9/42Issue resolution90% of issues closed
21.1/30PR acceptance19/27 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance0/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 6/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs19
open_issues3
closed_issues28
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio0.903
closed_unmerged_prs8
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
6.5/25Owner reach7 followers of l4nos
23.2/25Track record33 public repos, account ~8 yr old
Inputs used
followers7
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginl4nos
public_repos33
account_age_days3,276
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on packagist
26/35Publish recencylatest publish 218 days ago
20/20Version history21 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageslanos/laravel-cashier-stripe-connect
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish218

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

27At Risk · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://updev-1.gitbook.io/cashier-for-connect/
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://updev-1.gitbook.io/cashier-for-connect/
docs_sitehttps://updev-1.gitbook.io/cashier-for-connect/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

32At Risk · 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
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 6/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
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
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not 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_aggregate3.2
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.

20At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)llms.txt served by the project website (https://updev-1.gitbook.io/llms.txt)
14.4/40Legible commit history27 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://updev-1.gitbook.io/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.27
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
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_testsno
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
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 sizes0/41 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes7,668
source_files_sampled41
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

84GitHub stars
19contributors
13commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
4releases
2bus factor
3open 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 ★ / 43 ⇿
0Stars
43Forks
4Releases

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.

010203040504222022-112024-092026-08
Major 0Minor 1Patch 3

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.2 / 10
3.2aggregate

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 · 2026-09-01 02:37 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/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
3Code-ReviewFound 6/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
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
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 10
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistlaravel/cashier^12.6|^13.4|^v14.6.0|^v15.3.0|^16.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/console^9.0|^10.0|^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/contracts^9.0|^10.0|^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/database^9.0|^10.0|^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/http^9.0|^10.0|^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/log^9.0|^10.0|^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/notifications^9.0|^10.0|^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/routing^9.0|^10.0|^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/support^9.0|^10.0|^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/view^9.0|^10.0|^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
All dependencies 11

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 10 direct and 1 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistilluminate/consoledirect
Packagistilluminate/contractsdirect
Packagistilluminate/databasedirect
Packagistilluminate/httpdirect
Packagistilluminate/logdirect
Packagistilluminate/notificationsdirect
Packagistilluminate/routingdirect
Packagistilluminate/supportdirect
Packagistilluminate/viewdirect
Packagistlaravel/cashierdirect
Packagistphpindirect
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.