Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-18 05:07 UTC

pxlrbt / filament-excel

Excel Export for Filament Admin Resources

PHPMIT★ 459 stars⑂ 101 forkssince Feb 2022View on GitHub ↗

pxlrbt/filament-excel holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (76/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (37/100). It was last updated 30 days ago. 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

Dennis KochPersonal account
386 followers56 public repossince Oct 2016pixelarbeit

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
Packagistpxlrbt/filament-excelv4.1.0179,8486733 days agolaravelphpexcelactionsphpspreadsheetfilamentlaravel-filament

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

76Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 30 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence — 8/52 weeks with commits
16.2/18Commit volume — 63 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 21 commit(s) and 9 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year63
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push30
active_weeks_last_year8

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 65 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 33 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~31.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count65
latest_release_tagv4.1.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release33
mean_days_between_releases31.4
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
43.2/60Stars — 459 stars
16.7/25Forks — 101 forks
3.3/15Watchers — 5 watchers
Inputs used
forks101
stars459
watchers5
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_badges5
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
70.1/80Monthly downloads — 179,848 downloads/month across packagist
8/20Registry dependents — 15 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagespxlrbt/filament-excel
dependents15
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads2,989,222
monthly_downloads179,848
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

67Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 79% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 45 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled45
top_contributor_share0.789
How it's scored
41/42Issue resolution — 98% of issues closed
26.6/30PR acceptance — 109/123 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs109
open_issues3
closed_issues120
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.976
closed_unmerged_prs14
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
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
18.6/25Owner reach — 386 followers of pxlrbt
24.8/25Track record — 56 public repos, account ~9 yr old
Inputs used
followers386
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginpxlrbt
public_repos56
account_age_days3,634
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 33 days ago
20/20Version history — 67 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespxlrbt/filament-excel
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish33

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

64Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 11 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
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
topicsfilament, filamentadmin, excel, laravel, export, php
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?

69Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 11 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 1/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 21 commit(s) and 9 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
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
6.8/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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 instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
28.3/40Legible commit history — 53 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.53
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 practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
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 code — PHP without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/86 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes11,229
source_files_sampled86
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

459GitHub stars
45contributors
63commits, last 12 months
30days since last push
65releases
1bus factor
3open 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 ★ / 101 ⇿
0Stars
101Forks
62Releases

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.

0204060801009942022-022024-052026-08
Major 3Minor 12Patch 44

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.9 / 10
6.9aggregate

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 · 2026-09-18 05:07 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
9CI-Tests11 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 1/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained21 commit(s) and 9 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistfilament/tables^4.0|^5.0composer.json
Packagistmaatwebsite/excel^3.1|^4.0composer.json
Packagistanourvalar/eloquent-serialize^1.2composer.json
All dependencies 7

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 4 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistanourvalar/eloquent-serialize—direct
Packagistfilament/tables—direct
Packagistmaatwebsite/excel—direct
Packagistlaravel/pint—indirect
Packagistorchestra/testbench—indirect
Packagistpestphp/pest—indirect
Packagistphp—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.