Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-18 02:09 UTC

lucatume / wp-browser

The easy and reliable way to test WordPress with Codeception. 10 years of proven success.

PHPMIT★ 637 stars⑂ 85 forkssince Jun 2014View on GitHub ↗

lucatume/wp-browser holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (90/100) and lowest on Security (54/100). It was last updated 22 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

86
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.

86
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 72 is calibrated to 86 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

205 followers26 public repossince Nov 2012theAverageDev

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
Packagistlucatume/wp-browser4.7.2134,03742222 days agowordpresscodeception

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

80Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 22 days ago
9.7/36Commit cadence — 14/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 140 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year140
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push22
active_weeks_last_year14

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 22 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~20.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag3.8.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release22
mean_days_between_releases20.5
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?

65Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
45.5/60Stars — 637 stars
16/25Forks — 85 forks
6.5/15Watchers — 16 watchers
Inputs used
forks85
stars637
watchers16
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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
68.4/80Monthly downloads — 134,037 downloads/month across packagist
14.7/20Registry dependents — 157 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packageslucatume/wp-browser
dependents157
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads4,393,135
monthly_downloads134,037
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

66Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 96% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 53 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 22 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled53
top_contributor_share0.959
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
27.5/30PR acceptance — 394/430 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs394
open_issues0
closed_issues387
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d3
prs_decided_30d3
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs36
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
16.6/25Owner reach — 205 followers of lucatume
22.4/25Track record — 26 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers205
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginlucatume
public_repos26
account_age_days5,061
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 22 days ago
20/20Version history — 422 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageslucatume/wp-browser
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish22

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

90Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — phpcs.xml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 6 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://wpbrowser.wptestkit.dev/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicswordpress, tdd, codeception-module, php, testing
has_wikino
homepagehttps://wpbrowser.wptestkit.dev/
docs_sitehttps://wpbrowser.wptestkit.dev/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

54Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 6 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 22 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 1 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_aggregate4.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories1
affected_packages1
assessed_packages19
unassessed_packages30
affected_by_severityhigh 1
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 19 resolved dependencies against OSV. 30 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. Reachability is not analyzed.

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.

77Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 87 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.87
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes4,398
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile, tests/_data/fs-templates/bedrock/vendor/roots/wp-config/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — phpcs.xml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 26 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilescomposer.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile, tests/_data/fs-templates/bedrock/vendor/roots/wp-config/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.26
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 code — PHP without a type-check config
53.8/55Manageable file sizes — 13/597 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes244,697
source_files_sampled597
oversized_source_files13

Key facts

637GitHub stars
53contributors
140commits, last 12 months
22days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 85 ⇿
0Stars
85Forks
98Releases

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.

0204060801008122014-072020-072026-08
Major 0Minor 11Patch 87

Each point covers 12 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.3 / 10
4.3aggregate

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 · 2026-09-18 02:08 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests6 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 22 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 1 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 11
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistcodeception/codeception^5.0composer.json
Packagistcodeception/module-asserts^2.0 || ^3.0composer.json
Packagistcodeception/module-phpbrowser^2.0 || ^3.0composer.json
Packagistcodeception/module-webdriver^2.0 || ^3.0 || ^4.0composer.json
Packagistcodeception/module-db^2.0 || ^3.0composer.json
Packagistcodeception/module-filesystem^2.0 || ^3.0composer.json
Packagistcodeception/module-cli^2.0 || ^3.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/process>=4.4.24 <8.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/filesystem>=4.4.24 <8.0composer.json
Packagistvlucas/phpdotenv^5.0composer.json
Packagistdruidfi/mysqldump-php^1.1composer.json
All dependencies 49

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 12 direct and 37 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistcodeception/codeception—direct
Packagistcodeception/module-asserts—direct
Packagistcodeception/module-cli—direct
Packagistcodeception/module-db—direct
Packagistcodeception/module-filesystem—direct
Packagistcodeception/module-phpbrowser—direct
Packagistcodeception/module-webdriver—direct
Packagistdruidfi/mysqldump-php—direct
Packagistsymfony/filesystem—direct
Packagistsymfony/process—direct
Packagistvlucas/phpdotenv—direct
Packagistvlucas/phpdotenv5.5.0direct
Packagistautomattic/vipwpcs—indirect
Packagistcomposer-runtime-api—indirect
Packagistcomposer/installers2.2.0indirect
Packagistext-curl—indirect
Packagistext-ffi—indirect
Packagistext-fileinfo—indirect
Packagistext-json—indirect
Packagistext-mysqli—indirect
Packagistext-pdo—indirect
Packagistext-zip—indirect
Packagistgraham-campbell/result-type1.1.0indirect
Packagistgumlet/php-image-resize—indirect
Packagistlucatume/codeception-snapshot-assertions—indirect
Packagistoscarotero/env2.1.0indirect
Packagistphp—indirect
Packagistphpcompatibility/php-compatibility—indirect
Packagistphpoption/phpoption1.9.0indirect
Packagistphpstan/extension-installer—indirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan1.10.56indirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-symfony—indirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunit—indirect
Packagistrector/rector0.19.8indirect
Packagistroave/security-advisories—indirect
Packagistroots/bedrock-autoloader1.0.4indirect
Packagistroots/bedrock-disallow-indexing2.0.0indirect
Packagistroots/wordpress6.3indirect
Packagistroots/wordpress-core-installer1.100.0indirect
Packagistroots/wordpress-no-content6.3indirect
Packagistroots/wp-config1.0.0indirect
Packagistroots/wp-password-bcrypt1.1.0indirect
Packagistsquizlabs/php_codesniffer—indirect
Packagistsquizlabs/php_codesniffer3.7.1indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-ctype1.26.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-mbstring1.26.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-php801.26.0indirect
Packagistszepeviktor/phpstan-wordpress—indirect
Packagistwpackagist-theme/twentytwentythree1.1indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 19 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 30 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
squizlabs/php_codesniffer3.7.1indirecthigh14.0.2

An advisory means the version recorded in the dependency graph falls inside an advisory’s affected range. Reachability is not analysed, and the graph includes development and test pins — a finding may concern tooling rather than shipped software.

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 — Packagist.