Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-14 18:15 UTC

payrexx / payrexx-php

Payrexx API for PHP

PHPMIT★ 20 stars⑂ 25 forkssince Oct 2014View on GitHub ↗

payrexx/payrexx-php holds a health index of 75 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (81/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (37/100). It was last updated 28 days ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

75
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.

75
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 65 is calibrated to 75 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

PayrexxOrganization
15 followers16 public repossince Oct 2014

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagistpayrexx/payrexxv2.0.1614,5055631 days agopaymentgateway

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

77Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recencylast push 28 days ago
12.5/36Commit cadence18/52 weeks with commits
16.3/18Commit volume65 commits in the last year
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
commits_last_year65
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push28
active_weeks_last_year18

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases48 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 28 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~26.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count48
latest_release_tagv2.0.16
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release28
mean_days_between_releases26.8
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?

47Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
20.7/60Stars20 stars
11.5/25Forks25 forks
4.3/15Watchers7 watchers
Inputs used
forks25
stars20
watchers7
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
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
55.5/80Monthly downloads14,505 downloads/month across packagist
5.2/20Registry dependents5 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagespayrexx/payrexx
dependents5
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads394,054
monthly_downloads14,505
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

81Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
17.1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 24% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth24 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled24
top_contributor_share0.238
How it's scored
39.8/42Issue resolution95% of issues closed
25.8/30PR acceptance62/72 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs62
open_issues1
closed_issues18
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.947
closed_unmerged_prs10
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
0/20Verified domain
8.7/25Owner reach15 followers of payrexx
21/25Track record16 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers15
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginpayrexx
public_repos16
account_age_days4,351

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 31 days ago
20/20Version history56 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespayrexx/payrexx
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish31

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

67Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests8 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://www.payrexx.com
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsphp, payment-gateway, payment-integration, creditcard, sdk-php
has_wikino
homepage
docs_sitehttps://www.payrexx.com
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

52Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
4.5/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests8 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno data
7.5/7.5Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
2.2/7.5Maintained4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
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
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate5.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CII-Best-Practices, Packaging, Signed-Releases. 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.

37Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
18.1/40Legible commit history34 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.34
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePHP without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/88 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes18,357
source_files_sampled88
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

20GitHub stars
24contributors
65commits, last 12 months
28days since last push
48releases
3bus factor
1open 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 ★ / 25 ⇿
0Stars
25Forks
37Releases

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.

05101520252522017-102022-012026-04
Major 1Minor 2Patch 34

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.2 / 10
5.2aggregate

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 · 2026-09-14 18:15 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
6Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests8 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
n/aCII-Best-Practicesinternal error: error during http.Do: Get "https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects.json?url=https://github.com/payrexx/payrexx-php": Get "https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects.json?url=https://github.com/payrexx/payrexx-php": dial tcp: lookup www.bestpractices.dev on 127.0.0.11:53: server misbehaving
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
3Maintained4 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 5

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 5 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistext-curlindirect
Packagistguzzlehttp/guzzleindirect
Packagistpestphp/pestindirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstanindirect
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 statisticsPackagist.