Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-11 09:35 UTC

romanzipp / Laravel-Queue-Monitor

Monitoring Laravel Jobs with your Database

PHP · BladeMIT★ 830 stars⑂ 107 forkssince Feb 2018View on GitHub ↗

romanzipp/Laravel-Queue-Monitor holds a health index of 60 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (72/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (30/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

60
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

60
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 57 is calibrated to 60 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Roman ZippPersonal account
210 followers52 public repossince Mar 2015@enumco @Streamfinity

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 publish
Packagistromanzipp/laravel-queue-monitor5.4.557,28389295 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

48Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
4.2/36Commit cadence — 6/52 weeks with commits
10/18Commit volume — 12 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year12
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year6
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 18 releases published
0/36Release recency — latest release 1,126 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~203.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count18
latest_release_tag5.0.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1,126
mean_days_between_releases203.5
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
47.3/60Stars — 830 stars
16.9/25Forks — 107 forks
4.7/15Watchers — 8 watchers
Inputs used
forks107
stars830
watchers8
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_badges4
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
63.4/80Monthly downloads — 57,283 downloads/month across packagist
4/20Registry dependents — 3 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesromanzipp/laravel-queue-monitor
dependents3
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads1,967,162
monthly_downloads57,283
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

65Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2.8/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 87% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 29 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 7 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled29
top_contributor_share0.874
How it's scored
39/42Issue resolution — 93% of issues closed
26/30PR acceptance — 78/90 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 10/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs78
open_issues6
closed_issues78
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.929
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
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
16.7/25Owner reach — 210 followers of romanzipp
24.6/25Track record — 52 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers210
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginromanzipp
public_repos52
account_age_days4,241
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
26/35Publish recency — latest publish 295 days ago
20/20Version history — 89 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesromanzipp/laravel-queue-monitor
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish295

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

72Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .php-cs-fixer.dist.php
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
6/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 4 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://packagist.org/packages/romanzipp/laravel-queue-monitor
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicslaravel, php, php7, queue, showcase
has_wikino
homepagehttps://packagist.org/packages/romanzipp/laravel-queue-monitor
docs_sitehttps://packagist.org/packages/romanzipp/laravel-queue-monitor
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

42Weak · 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
0.8/2.5CI-Tests — 4 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 3
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5Code-Review — Found 10/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 7 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 17 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate2.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories17
affected_packages8
assessed_packages63
unassessed_packages14
affected_by_severityhigh 5, moderate 3
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 63 resolved dependencies against OSV. 14 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. Reachability is not analyzed.

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.

30At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
1.1/40Legible commit history — 2 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.02
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .php-cs-fixer.dist.php
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesyarn.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
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 — 0/61 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes15,293
source_files_sampled61
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

830GitHub stars
29contributors
12commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
18releases
1bus factor
6open issues
npm, Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 107 ⇿
0Stars
107Forks
7Releases

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.

02040608010012010632018-092022-082026-07
Major 4Minor 1Patch 2

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 2.8 / 10
2.8aggregate

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 · 2026-10-11 09:34 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
3CI-Tests4 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 3
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 10/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
10Contributorsproject has 7 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0Vulnerabilities17 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 5
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistilluminate/database^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/queue^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/support^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistnesbot/carbon^3.0composer.json
npmtailwindcss^3.2.7package.json
All dependencies 77

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 72 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmtailwindcss3.2.7direct
Packagistilluminate/database—direct
Packagistilluminate/queue—direct
Packagistilluminate/support—direct
Packagistnesbot/carbon—direct
npm@nodelib/fs.scandir2.1.5indirect
npm@nodelib/fs.stat2.0.5indirect
npm@nodelib/fs.walk1.2.8indirect
npmacorn7.4.1indirect
npmacorn-node1.8.2indirect
npmacorn-walk7.2.0indirect
npmanymatch3.1.3indirect
npmarg5.0.2indirect
npmbinary-extensions2.2.0indirect
npmbraces3.0.2indirect
npmcamelcase-css2.0.1indirect
npmchokidar3.5.3indirect
npmcolor-name1.1.4indirect
npmcssesc3.0.0indirect
npmdefined1.0.1indirect
npmdetective5.2.1indirect
npmdidyoumean1.2.2indirect
npmdlv1.1.3indirect
npmfast-glob3.2.12indirect
npmfastq1.15.0indirect
npmfill-range7.0.1indirect
npmfsevents2.3.2indirect
npmfunction-bind1.1.1indirect
npmglob-parent5.1.2indirect
npmglob-parent6.0.2indirect
npmhas1.0.3indirect
npmis-binary-path2.1.0indirect
npmis-core-module2.11.0indirect
npmis-extglob2.1.1indirect
npmis-glob4.0.3indirect
npmis-number7.0.0indirect
npmlilconfig2.1.0indirect
npmmerge21.4.1indirect
npmmicromatch4.0.5indirect
npmminimist1.2.8indirect
npmnanoid3.3.4indirect
npmnormalize-path3.0.0indirect
npmobject-hash3.0.0indirect
npmpath-parse1.0.7indirect
npmpicocolors1.0.0indirect
npmpicomatch2.3.1indirect
npmpify2.3.0indirect
npmpostcss8.4.21indirect
npmpostcss-import14.1.0indirect
npmpostcss-js4.0.1indirect
npmpostcss-load-config3.1.4indirect
npmpostcss-nested6.0.0indirect
npmpostcss-selector-parser6.0.11indirect
npmpostcss-value-parser4.2.0indirect
npmqueue-microtask1.2.3indirect
npmquick-lru5.1.1indirect
npmread-cache1.0.0indirect
npmreaddirp3.6.0indirect
npmresolve1.22.1indirect
npmreusify1.0.4indirect
npmrun-parallel1.2.0indirect
npmsource-map-js1.0.2indirect
npmsupports-preserve-symlinks-flag1.0.0indirect
npmto-regex-range5.0.1indirect
npmutil-deprecate1.0.2indirect
npmxtend4.0.2indirect
npmyaml1.10.2indirect
Packagistext-json—indirect
Packagistext-mbstring—indirect
Packagistfriendsofphp/php-cs-fixer—indirect
Packagistlaravel/framework—indirect
Packagistmockery/mockery—indirect
Packagistorchestra/testbench—indirect
Packagistphp—indirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan—indirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunit—indirect
Packagistromanzipp/php-cs-fixer-config—indirect
Dependency advisories 8

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 63 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 8 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 14 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
braces3.0.2indirecthigh23.0.3
nanoid3.3.4indirecthigh45.1.16
picomatch2.3.1indirecthigh24.0.4
postcss8.4.21indirecthigh58.5.23
source-map-js1.0.2indirecthigh11.2.2
micromatch4.0.5indirectmoderate14.0.8
postcss-selector-parser6.0.11indirectmoderate17.1.6
yaml1.10.2indirectmoderate12.8.3

An advisory means the version recorded in the dependency graph falls inside an advisory’s affected range. Reachability is not analysed, and the graph includes development and test pins — a finding may concern tooling rather than shipped software.

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.