Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-13 19:22 UTC

open-feature / php-sdk

PHP implementation of the OpenFeature SDK

PHPApache-2.0★ 43 stars⑂ 13 forkssince Sep 2022View on GitHub ↗

open-feature/php-sdk holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (75/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (45/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

80
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.

80
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

OpenFeatureOrganization · verified domain
1,532 followers60 public repossince Feb 2022

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagistopen-feature/sdk2.3.0145,7033849 days agofeatureflagsfeatureflaggingopenfeature

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

69Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 2 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence — 8/52 weeks with commits
10.6/18Commit volume — 14 commits in the last year
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
commits_last_year14
human_commit_share0.37
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year8
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 39 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 49 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~80 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count39
latest_release_tag2.3.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release49
mean_days_between_releases80
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?

66Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
26.3/60Stars — 43 stars
9/25Forks — 13 forks
1.7/15Watchers — 3 watchers
Inputs used
forks13
stars43
watchers3
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
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_badges6
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesbestpractices.coreinfrastructure.org, poser.pugx.org, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
68.8/80Monthly downloads — 145,703 downloads/month across packagist
9.2/20Registry dependents — 23 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesopen-feature/sdk
dependents23
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads1,097,050
monthly_downloads145,703
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

75Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
7.6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 66% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 13 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled13
top_contributor_share0.662
How it's scored
26.9/42Issue resolution — 64% of issues closed
24.7/30PR acceptance — 108/131 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs108
open_issues14
closed_issues25
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.641
closed_unmerged_prs23
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 backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
22.9/25Owner reach — 1,532 followers of open-feature
22.2/25Track record — 60 public repos, account ~4 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,532
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginopen-feature
public_repos60
account_age_days1,675

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 49 days ago
20/20Version history — 38 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesopen-feature/sdk
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish49

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

75Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
8/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 14 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://openfeature.dev
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsopenfeature, php, feature-flags
has_wikino
homepagehttps://openfeature.dev
docs_sitehttps://openfeature.dev
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

58Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
1/2.5CI-Tests — 14 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
1.2/2.5CII-Best-Practices — badge detected: Passing
7.5/7.5Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 5 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
1.5/7.5Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file 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_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate5.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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.

45Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 36 of 37 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.973
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 38 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.38
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
54.5/55Manageable file sizes — 1/108 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes72,136
source_files_sampled108
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

43GitHub stars
13contributors
14commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
39releases
1bus factor
14open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch packagist package 'open-feature/integration-tests' from its registry
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 13 ⇿
0Stars
13Forks
27Releases

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.

0246810121212022-122024-102026-07
Major 1Minor 6Patch 20

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.8 / 10
5.8aggregate

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 · 2026-09-13 19:21 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
4CI-Tests14 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
5CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: Passing
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
2Maintained1 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistmyclabs/php-enum^1.8composer.json
Packagistpsr/log^2.0 || ^3.0composer.json
Packagistopen-feature/sdk^2.0.0integration/composer.json
Packagistopen-feature/flagd-provider^1.0.0integration/composer.json
Packagistguzzlehttp/guzzle^7.5integration/composer.json
Packagistguzzlehttp/psr7^2.4integration/composer.json
All dependencies 30

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 6 direct and 24 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistguzzlehttp/guzzle—direct
Packagistguzzlehttp/psr7—direct
Packagistmyclabs/php-enum—direct
Packagistopen-feature/flagd-provider—direct
Packagistopen-feature/sdk—direct
Packagistpsr/log—direct
Packagistbehat/behat—indirect
Packagistcaptainhook/captainhook—indirect
Packagistcaptainhook/plugin-composer—indirect
Packagistdg/bypass-finals—indirect
Packagistergebnis/composer-normalize—indirect
Packagisthamcrest/hamcrest-php—indirect
Packagistmdwheele/zalgo—indirect
Packagistmockery/mockery—indirect
Packagistphp—indirect
Packagistphp-parallel-lint/php-console-highlighter—indirect
Packagistphp-parallel-lint/php-parallel-lint—indirect
Packagistphpstan/extension-installer—indirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan—indirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-mockery—indirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-phpunit—indirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunit—indirect
Packagistpsalm/plugin-mockery—indirect
Packagistpsalm/plugin-phpunit—indirect
Packagistramsey/coding-standard—indirect
Packagistramsey/composer-repl—indirect
Packagistramsey/conventional-commits—indirect
Packagistroave/security-advisories—indirect
Packagistspatie/phpunit-snapshot-assertions—indirect
Packagistvimeo/psalm—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.