Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-17 17:39 UTC

pushery / legal-consent-for-laravel

Built to support GDPR/DSGVO-compliant legal consent workflows in Laravel. Render versioned legal documents and maintain an append-only audit ledger showing exactly what each user accepted, acknowledged, or withdrew.

PHPMIT★ 3 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Jul 2026View on GitHub ↗

pushery/legal-consent-for-laravel holds a health index of 44 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on Vitality (74/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (11/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

44
overall / 100
Weak

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.

44
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 46 is calibrated to 44 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

PUSHERYPersonal account
6 followers7 public repossince Mar 2026

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagistpushery/legal-consent-for-laravelv0.12.02,6781311 days agolaravel

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

74Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
3.5/36Commit cadence5/52 weeks with commits
10.6/18Commit volume14 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintainedno data
Inputs used
commits_last_year14
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year5

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases14 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~3.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count14
latest_release_tagv0.13.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases3.4

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

38Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
4.9/60Stars3 stars
0/25Forks0 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars3
watchers0
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_badges5
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
45.7/80Monthly downloads2,678 downloads/month across packagist
0/20Registry dependents0 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagespushery/legal-consent-for-laravel
dependents0
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads2,709
monthly_downloads2,678
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

56Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth1 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsno data
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolutionno issues or no data
30/30PR acceptance14/14 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewno data
Inputs used
merged_prs14
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d9
prs_decided_30d9
issue_closed_ratio
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
6.1/25Owner reach6 followers of pushery
7.3/25Track record7 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers6
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginpushery
public_repos7
account_age_days139
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 11 days ago
20/20Version history13 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespushery/legal-consent-for-laravel
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish11

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

21At 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-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics19 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsaudit, audit-log, audit-tech, comliance, consent, datenschutz, document-versioning, dsgvo, gdpr, laravel, laravel-fortify, laravel-framework, laravel-package, legal, php, php8, privacy, regulatory-compliance, user-consent
has_wikino
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?

40Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
30/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
0/25Dependabot config
0/25Dependency lockfilespublished library — lockfiles are an application concern, not expected
0/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfiles
manifestscomposer.json
has_codeql_workflowno
has_security_policyyes
has_dependabot_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dependency lockfiles. 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.

11Critical · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePHP without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/200 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes30,418
source_files_sampled200
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

3GitHub stars
1contributors
14commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
14releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
  • OpenSSF Scorecard did not return a usable result (Skipping github.com/pushery/legal-consent-for-laravel: run: internal error: ListCommits:error during graphqlHandler.setup: internal error: githubv4.Query: non-200 OK status code: 503 Service Unavailable body: "{\"message\": \"No server is currently available to service your request. Sorry about that. Please try resubmitting your request and contact us if the problem persists.\"}\r\n"); skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Direct dependencies 13
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistilluminate/auth^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/bus^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/cache^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/collections^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/console^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/contracts^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/database^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/http^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/log^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/notifications^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/routing^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/support^13.0composer.json
Packagistleague/commonmark^2.9composer.json
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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.