Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-17 09:54 UTC

num-num / ubl-invoice

A modern object-oriented PHP library to read and create valid UBL and Peppol BIS files

PHPMIT★ 138 stars⑂ 97 forkssince Oct 2018View on GitHub ↗

num-num/ubl-invoice holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (83/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (47/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

78
overall / 100
Good

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.

78
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 67 is calibrated to 78 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

NumNumOrganization
2 followers1 public reposince Sep 2017

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

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

70Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
7.6/36Commit cadence11/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume128 commits in the last year
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
commits_last_year128
human_commit_share0.98
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year11
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases10 releases published
16.2/36Release recencylatest release 188 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~5.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count10
latest_release_tagv2.4.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release188
mean_days_between_releases5.9
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?

62Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
34.7/60Stars138 stars
16.5/25Forks97 forks
4.7/15Watchers8 watchers
Inputs used
forks97
stars138
watchers8
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
60.6/80Monthly downloads35,188 downloads/month across packagist
0/20Registry dependents0 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesnum-num/ubl-invoice
dependents0
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads984,404
monthly_downloads35,188
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
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
5.4/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 76% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth39 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 11 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled39
top_contributor_share0.762
How it's scored
33.1/42Issue resolution79% of issues closed
25.9/30PR acceptance107/124 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance2/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
9/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 9/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
merged_prs107
open_issues10
closed_issues37
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio0.787
closed_unmerged_prs17
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d2
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
3.4/25Owner reach2 followers of num-num
14.2/25Track record1 public repos, account ~8 yr old
Inputs used
followers2
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginnum-num
public_repos1
account_age_days3,260
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 188 days ago
20/20Version history84 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesnum-num/ubl-invoice
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish188

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

83Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configphpcs.xml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests14 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics7 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsphp, ubl, ubl-invoice, peppol, ubl21, xml, ubl20
has_wikino
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

59Moderate · 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
2.2/2.5CI-Tests14 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 9/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 11 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
1.5/7.5Maintained3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6.8/7.5Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories1
affected_packages1
assessed_packages54
unassessed_packages0
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 54 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.

47Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
38.6/40Legible commit history71 of 98 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.724
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configphpcs.xml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance2 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilescomposer.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.02
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePHP without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/84 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes31,920
source_files_sampled84
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

138GitHub stars
39contributors
128commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
10releases
1bus factor
10open 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 ★ / 97 ⇿
0Stars
97Forks
10Releases

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.

0204060801009342019-012022-102026-07
Major 1Minor 4Patch 5

Each point covers 7 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 · 2026-08-17 09:54 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
9CI-Tests14 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6Code-ReviewFound 9/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
10Contributorsproject has 11 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
2Maintained3 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistsabre/xml^4.0composer.json
Packagistnesbot/carbon^2.72 || ^3.11composer.json
Packagistdoctrine/collections^1.8 || ^2.0 || ^3.0composer.json
All dependencies 54

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 51 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistdoctrine/collections1.8.0direct
Packagistnesbot/carbon2.72.6direct
Packagistsabre/xml4.0.6direct
Packagistbrianium/paratest6.11.1indirect
Packagistcarbonphp/carbon-doctrine-types2.1.0indirect
Packagistdoctrine/deprecations1.1.4indirect
Packagistdoctrine/instantiator1.5.0indirect
Packagistfidry/cpu-core-counter1.2.0indirect
Packagistjean85/pretty-package-versions2.1.0indirect
Packagistmyclabs/deep-copy1.13.4indirect
Packagistnikic/php-parser5.7.0indirect
Packagistphar-io/manifest2.0.4indirect
Packagistphar-io/version3.2.1indirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan1.12.15indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-code-coverage9.2.32indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-file-iterator3.0.6indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-invoker3.1.1indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-text-template2.0.4indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-timer5.0.3indirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunit9.6.33indirect
Packagistpsr/clock1.0.0indirect
Packagistpsr/container1.1.2indirect
Packagistsabre/uri3.0.2indirect
Packagistsebastian/cli-parser1.0.2indirect
Packagistsebastian/code-unit1.0.8indirect
Packagistsebastian/code-unit-reverse-lookup2.0.3indirect
Packagistsebastian/comparator4.0.10indirect
Packagistsebastian/complexity2.0.3indirect
Packagistsebastian/diff4.0.6indirect
Packagistsebastian/environment5.1.5indirect
Packagistsebastian/exporter4.0.8indirect
Packagistsebastian/global-state5.0.8indirect
Packagistsebastian/lines-of-code1.0.4indirect
Packagistsebastian/object-enumerator4.0.4indirect
Packagistsebastian/object-reflector2.0.4indirect
Packagistsebastian/recursion-context4.0.6indirect
Packagistsebastian/resource-operations3.0.4indirect
Packagistsebastian/type3.2.1indirect
Packagistsebastian/version3.0.2indirect
Packagistsquizlabs/php_codesniffer3.11.2indirect
Packagistsymfony/console5.4.47indirect
Packagistsymfony/deprecation-contracts2.5.4indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-ctype1.31.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-intl-grapheme1.31.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-intl-normalizer1.31.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-mbstring1.31.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-php731.31.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-php801.33.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/process5.4.51indirect
Packagistsymfony/service-contracts2.5.4indirect
Packagistsymfony/string5.4.47indirect
Packagistsymfony/translation5.4.45indirect
Packagistsymfony/translation-contracts2.5.4indirect
Packagisttheseer/tokenizer1.3.1indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 54 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
squizlabs/php_codesniffer3.11.2indirecthigh14.0.2

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsPackagist.