Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-20 14:42 UTC

phpstan / phpstan-mockery

PHPStan extension for Mockery

PHPMIT★ 109 stars⑂ 25 forkssince Jul 2018View on GitHub ↗

phpstan/phpstan-mockery holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (76/100) and lowest on Vitality (55/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

71
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.

71
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 63 is calibrated to 71 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

PHPStanOrganization · verified domain
260 followers25 public repossince Dec 2015

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-mockery2.0.01,687,52028736 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

55Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 4 days ago
7.6/36Commit cadence — 11/52 weeks with commits
12.6/18Commit volume — 24 commits in the last year
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
commits_last_year24
human_commit_share0.76
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year11
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 19 releases published
7.2/36Release recency — latest release 708 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~158.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count19
latest_release_tag2.0.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release708
mean_days_between_releases158.6
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?

61Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
33/60Stars — 109 stars
11.5/25Forks — 25 forks
1.7/15Watchers — 3 watchers
Inputs used
forks25
stars109
watchers3
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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_badges3
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, poser.pugx.org
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 1,687,520 downloads/month across packagist
19.5/20Registry dependents — 831 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesphpstan/phpstan-mockery
dependents831
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads32,242,369
monthly_downloads1,687,520
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

64Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 69% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 21 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled21
top_contributor_share0.693
How it's scored
24/42Issue resolution — 57% of issues closed
25.5/30PR acceptance — 68/80 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 9/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs68
open_issues9
closed_issues12
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.571
closed_unmerged_prs12
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
17.4/25Owner reach — 260 followers of phpstan
22.3/25Track record — 25 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers260
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginphpstan
public_repos25
account_age_days3,952
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
4/35Publish recency — latest publish 736 days ago
20/20Version history — 28 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesphpstan/phpstan-mockery
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish736

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 7 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — phpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 18 out of 22 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsphpstan, static-code-analysis, static-analysis, php, php7, mockery
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?

60Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2/2.5CI-Tests — 18 out of 22 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3/7.5Code-Review — Found 9/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0.8/7.5Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
1.5/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 3
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_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate6
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.

65Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
9.1/40Legible commit history — 13 of 76 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.171
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes5,951
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — phpstan.neon
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 8 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 24 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_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.08
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.24
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 — 0/20 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes3,690
source_files_sampled20
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

109GitHub stars
21contributors
24commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
19releases
1bus factor
9open 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
16Releases

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.

05101520252522019-032022-122026-09
Major 2Minor 1Patch 13

Each point covers 7 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.0 / 10
6.0aggregate

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 · 2026-10-20 14:42 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
8CI-Tests18 out of 22 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4Code-ReviewFound 9/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
10Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
1Maintained2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
3SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 3
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 8

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 8 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistmockery/mockery—indirect
Packagistphp—indirect
Packagistphp-parallel-lint/php-parallel-lint—indirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan—indirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-phpunit—indirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-strict-rules—indirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunit—indirect
Packagistshipmonk/name-collision-detector—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.