Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-10 01:57 UTC

mike-bronner / laravel-model-caching

Eloquent model-caching made easy.

PHPMIT★ 2,374 stars⑂ 229 forkssince Sep 2017View on GitHub ↗

mike-bronner/laravel-model-caching holds a health index of 83 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (85/100) and lowest on Security (49/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

83
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.

83
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 70 is calibrated to 83 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Mike BronnerOrganization
4 followers17 public repossince Mar 2026

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Packagistmike-bronner/laravel-model-caching13.1.1065,3701810 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

83Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
8.3/36Commit cadence — 12/52 weeks with commits
17.8/18Commit volume — 94 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 17 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year94
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year12

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~17.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag13.1.10
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases17.1
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?

85Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
54.8/60Stars — 2,374 stars
19.7/25Forks — 229 forks
8.7/15Watchers — 37 watchers
Inputs used
forks229
stars2,374
watchers37
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

100Exceptional
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
7.2/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges9
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicescodecov.io, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
64.2/80Monthly downloads — 65,370 downloads/month across packagist
4/20Registry dependents — 3 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesmike-bronner/laravel-model-caching
dependents3
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads234,486
monthly_downloads65,370
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

62Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 87% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 51 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 6 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled51
top_contributor_share0.869
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
23.8/30PR acceptance — 166/209 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 5/5 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 11/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs166
open_issues0
closed_issues377
prs_merged_7d9
prs_decided_7d9
prs_merged_30d9
prs_decided_30d9
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs43
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d5
first_time_prs_decided_30d5
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
5/25Owner reach — 4 followers of mike-bronner
10.1/25Track record — 17 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers4
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginmike-bronner
public_repos17
account_age_days175

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 181 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesmike-bronner/laravel-model-caching
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

74Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — phpcs.xml, phpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 21 out of 21 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

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicslaravel, caching, models, package
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?

49Weak · 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 — 21 out of 21 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
2.2/7.5Code-Review — Found 11/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 6 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 — 17 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
2/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 4
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_aggregate4.9
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.

51Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
36.8/40Legible commit history — 69 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.69
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — phpcs.xml, phpstan.neon
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — devcontainer, Dockerfile
6/10Demonstrated agent practice — 3 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.03
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
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/246 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes40,285
source_files_sampled246
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

2,374GitHub stars
51contributors
94commits, last 12 months
0days 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
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 229 ⇿
0Stars
229Forks
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.

0408012016020024021982017-102022-032026-09
Major 3Minor 10Patch 82

Each point covers 9 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.9 / 10
4.9aggregate

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 · 2026-09-10 01:56 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests21 out of 21 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 11/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
10Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained17 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
4SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 4
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 8
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistmikebronner/laravel-pivot-events^13.1composer.json
Packagistilluminate/cache^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/config^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/console^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/container^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/database^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/http^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/support^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
All dependencies 23

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 8 direct and 15 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistilluminate/cache—direct
Packagistilluminate/config—direct
Packagistilluminate/console—direct
Packagistilluminate/container—direct
Packagistilluminate/database—direct
Packagistilluminate/http—direct
Packagistilluminate/support—direct
Packagistmikebronner/laravel-pivot-events—direct
Packagistaws/aws-sdk-php—indirect
Packagistdoctrine/dbal—indirect
Packagistfakerphp/faker—indirect
Packagistlarastan/larastan—indirect
Packagistlaravel/boost—indirect
Packagistlaravel/pint—indirect
Packagistorchestra/testbench—indirect
Packagistpestphp/pest—indirect
Packagistpestphp/pest-plugin-laravel—indirect
Packagistphp—indirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunit—indirect
Packagistpredis/predis—indirect
Packagistslevomat/coding-standard—indirect
Packagistsquizlabs/php_codesniffer—indirect
Packagistsymfony/thanks—indirect
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 — Packagist.