Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-27 17:19 UTC

laravel / pail

Dive into your Laravel application's log files directly from the console. 🪣

PHPMIT★ 926 stars⑂ 32 forkssince Sep 2023View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

laravel/pail holds a health index of 84 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (84/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (33/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

84
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

84
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 71 is calibrated to 84 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

LaravelOrganization · verified domain
11,019 followers141 public repossince Aug 2011

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagistlaravel/pailv1.2.77,236,2841898 days agophplaraveltaillogsdev

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

73Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 1 days ago
9.7/36Commit cadence14/52 weeks with commits
12.2/18Commit volume22 commits in the last year
9/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained11 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
commits_last_year22
human_commit_share0.96
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year14
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases16 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 92 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~67.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count16
latest_release_tagv1.2.7
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release92
mean_days_between_releases67.7
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?

84Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
48.1/60Stars926 stars
12.4/25Forks32 forks
6.4/15Watchers15 watchers
Inputs used
forks32
stars926
watchers15
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 (MIT)
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_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads7,236,284 downloads/month across packagist
19.6/20Registry dependents868 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packageslaravel/pail
dependents868
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads74,388,623
monthly_downloads7,236,284
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

73Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
7.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 66% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth16 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 20 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled16
top_contributor_share0.661
How it's scored
33.9/42Issue resolution81% of issues closed
21.1/30PR acceptance40/57 decided PRs merged
2.6/13Newcomer PR acceptance1/5 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
7.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 12/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
merged_prs40
open_issues5
closed_issues21
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d3
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d5
issue_closed_ratio0.808
closed_unmerged_prs17
first_time_authors_30d3
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d5
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach11,019 followers of laravel
25/25Track record141 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers11,019
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginlaravel
public_repos141
account_age_days5,502

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 98 days ago
20/20Version history18 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageslaravel/pail
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish98

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

61Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows7 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
14/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests15 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicslaravel, logs, php, tail
has_wikino
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

70Good · 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
1.8/2.5CI-Tests15 out of 19 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
3.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 12/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 20 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
6.8/7.5Maintained11 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 9
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
2/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 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_aggregate7
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.

33At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
21.7/40Legible commit history39 of 96 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.406
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance4 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.04
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 sizes0/28 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes10,633
source_files_sampled28
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

926GitHub stars
16contributors
22commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
16releases
1bus factor
5open 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 ★ / 32 ⇿
0Stars
32Forks
16Releases

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.

01325383222023-092025-032026-08
Major 1Minor 2Patch 13

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.0 / 10
7.0aggregate

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 · 2026-08-27 17:19 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
7CI-Tests15 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5Code-ReviewFound 12/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
10Contributorsproject has 20 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
9Maintained11 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 9
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
4SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 4
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 7
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistilluminate/console^10.24|^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/contracts^10.24|^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/log^10.24|^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/process^10.24|^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/support^10.24|^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistnunomaduro/termwind^1.15|^2.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/console^6.0|^7.0|^8.0composer.json
All dependencies 17

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 10 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistilluminate/consoledirect
Packagistilluminate/contractsdirect
Packagistilluminate/logdirect
Packagistilluminate/processdirect
Packagistilluminate/supportdirect
Packagistnunomaduro/termwinddirect
Packagistsymfony/consoledirect
Packagistext-mbstringindirect
Packagistlaravel/frameworkindirect
Packagistlaravel/pintindirect
Packagistorchestra/testbench-coreindirect
Packagistpestphp/pestindirect
Packagistpestphp/pest-plugin-type-coverageindirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstanindirect
Packagistsymfony/var-dumperindirect
Packagistsymfony/yamlindirect
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.