Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-20 01:38 UTC

raphaelstolt / lean-package-validator

A library and CLI for validating and managing package release contents in lean distribution archives.

PHPMIT★ 18 stars⑂ 8 forkssince Sep 2016View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

raphaelstolt/lean-package-validator holds a health index of 69 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (85/100) and lowest on Security (43/100). It was last updated 3 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

69
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.

69
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 62 is calibrated to 69 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Raphael StoltPersonal account
86 followers160 public repossince Jan 2009

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
Packagiststolt/lean-package-validatorv6.3.23,091993 days agopackageclivalidationprojectformattingcreationdevreleaseclassicdistleangitattributesexport-ignorelpvnegated

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

85Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 3 days ago
16.6/36Commit cadence — 24/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 157 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year157
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push3
active_weeks_last_year24
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 75 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 3 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~15.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count75
latest_release_tagv6.3.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release3
mean_days_between_releases15.2

Community & Adoption

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

55Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
20/60Stars — 18 stars
7/25Forks — 8 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks8
stars18
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
7.2/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges10
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, poser.pugx.org, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
46.5/80Monthly downloads — 3,091 downloads/month across packagist
10.4/20Registry dependents — 35 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesstolt/lean-package-validator
dependents35
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads20,439
monthly_downloads3,091
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

50Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.1/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 4 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.995
How it's scored
38.6/42Issue resolution — 92% of issues closed
0/30PR acceptance — 0/5 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs0
open_issues6
closed_issues67
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.918
closed_unmerged_prs5
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
13.9/25Owner reach — 86 followers of raphaelstolt
25/25Track record — 160 public repos, account ~17 yr old
Inputs used
followers86
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginraphaelstolt
public_repos160
account_age_days6,480
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 3 days ago
20/20Version history — 99 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesstolt/lean-package-validator
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish3

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

77Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .php-cs-fixer.php
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 14 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsrepository-utilities, gitattributes, carbon-footprint, repository-management, datensparsamkeit, gitattributes-generator, git-utilities, package-management, package-artifacts, gitattributes-templates, gitattributes-validator, ai-skills, gitattributes-creator, lean-dist-releases
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?

43Weak · 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
0/2.5CI-Tests — no data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
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
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
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_aggregate4.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, 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.

54Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0.5/40Legible commit history — 1 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.01
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes2,087
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .php-cs-fixer.php
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
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
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
54.3/55Manageable file sizes — 1/79 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes68,266
source_files_sampled79
oversized_source_files1
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — example
Inputs used
example_dirsexample
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

18GitHub stars
4contributors
157commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
75releases
1bus factor
6open 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 ★ / 8 ⇿
0Stars
8Forks
52Releases

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.

02468812017-112022-012026-04
Major 4Minor 17Patch 31

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.3 / 10
4.3aggregate

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 01:38 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 4
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistlaravel/agent-detector^2.0composer.json
Packagistsebastian/diff^9.0||^8.0||^7.0.0||^6.0.1||^5.0||^4.0.3composer.json
Packagiststolt/list-skills-command^1.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/console^8.0||^7.2.1||^v5.4.8composer.json
All dependencies 20

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 16 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistlaravel/agent-detector—direct
Packagistsebastian/diff—direct
Packagiststolt/list-skills-command—direct
Packagistsymfony/console—direct
Packagistcarthage-software/mago—indirect
Packagistdg/bypass-finals—indirect
Packagistfriendsofphp/php-cs-fixer—indirect
Packagistlaravel/pao—indirect
Packagistmockery/mockery—indirect
Packagistpeckphp/peck—indirect
Packagistphlak/semver—indirect
Packagistphp—indirect
Packagistphp-mock/php-mock—indirect
Packagistphp-mock/php-mock-phpunit—indirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan—indirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunit—indirect
Packagistshipmonk/composer-dependency-analyser—indirect
Packagiststolt/composer-peel—indirect
Packagiststolt/version-aligner—indirect
Packagistzenstruck/console-test—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.