Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-19 09:51 UTC

modmore / Gitify

Command line toolkit to make managing a MODX site in git a lot easier.

PHPMIT★ 123 stars⑂ 54 forkssince Jun 2014View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

modmore/Gitify holds a health index of 23 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (66/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (25/100). It was last updated 114 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

23
overall / 100
At Risk

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.

23
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 43 is calibrated to 39 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

modmoreOrganization · verified domain
15 followers77 public repossince Mar 2013

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Packagistmodmore/gitify2.2.0-pl31625365 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

31At Risk · 21% of overall
How it's scored
9.9/36Push recencylast push 114 days ago
0/36Commit cadence0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share0.87
days_since_last_push114
active_weeks_last_year0
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases14 releases published
16.2/36Release recencylatest release 364 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~160 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count14
latest_release_tag2.2.0-pl
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release364
mean_days_between_releases160
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?

53Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
33.8/60Stars123 stars
14.4/25Forks54 forks
7.4/15Watchers22 watchers
Inputs used
forks54
stars123
watchers22
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
7.2/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
33.3/80Monthly downloads316 downloads/month across packagist
0/20Registry dependents0 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesmodmore/gitify
dependents0
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads8,230
monthly_downloads316
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 factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
10.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 53% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth30 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled30
top_contributor_share0.531
How it's scored
30.5/42Issue resolution73% of issues closed
11.6/30PR acceptance95/245 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
7.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 5/10 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
merged_prs95
open_issues57
closed_issues152
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.727
closed_unmerged_prs150
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
20/20Verified domain
8.7/25Owner reach15 followers of modmore
25/25Track record77 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers15
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginmodmore
public_repos77
account_age_days4,920
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on packagist
26/35Publish recencylatest publish 365 days ago
20/20Version history25 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesmodmore/gitify
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish365

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

25At 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 12 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

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsgitify, modx, modx-revolution
has_wikiyes
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?

42Weak · 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 12 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
3.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 5/10 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 10 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
0/7.5Maintained0 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
3.8/7.5Vulnerabilities5 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate3.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10.1/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories2 affected: symfony/process 5.3.7 (high 8.4), symfony/yaml 5.4.35 (moderate 5.3)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
29.8/40No advisories left outstanding2 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 681 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories5
affected_packages2
assessed_packages13
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 1, moderate 1
direct_affected_packages2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 13 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

27At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
22.1/40Legible commit history36 of 87 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.414
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
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance13 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfilescomposer.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.13
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 sizes0/14 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes30,330
source_files_sampled14
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

123GitHub stars
30contributors
0commits, last 12 months
114days since last push
14releases
1bus factor
57open 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 ★ / 54 ⇿
0Stars
54Forks
14Releases

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.

01020304050605122014-092020-042025-10
Major 1Minor 4Patch 1

Each point covers 11 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.9 / 10
3.9aggregate

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 · 2026-09-19 09:51 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5Code-ReviewFound 5/10 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
10Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 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
5Vulnerabilities5 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistsymfony/console5.4.*composer.json
Packagistsymfony/yaml5.4.*composer.json
Packagistsymfony/process5.3.*composer.json
All dependencies 13

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 10 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistsymfony/console5.4.36direct
Packagistsymfony/process5.3.7direct
Packagistsymfony/yaml5.4.35direct
Packagistpsr/container1.1.1indirect
Packagistsymfony/deprecation-contracts2.5.2indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-ctype1.29.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-intl-grapheme1.29.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-intl-normalizer1.29.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-mbstring1.29.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-php731.29.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-php801.29.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/service-contracts2.5.2indirect
Packagistsymfony/string5.4.36indirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 13 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 2 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
symfony/process5.3.7directhigh28.0.5
symfony/yaml5.4.35directmoderate38.0.12

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 statisticsPackagist.