Public record
Software health reportschema 0.30.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-03 03:41 UTC

schmittjoh / serializer

Library for (de-)serializing data of any complexity (supports JSON, and XML)

PHPMIT★ 2,343 stars⑂ 589 forkssince Dec 2012View on GitHub ↗

schmittjoh/serializer holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (89/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (41/100). It was last updated 66 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

80
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

80
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

JohannesPersonal account
1,044 followers85 public repossince Feb 2010Scrutinizer GmbH

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
Packagistjms/serializer3.32.72,034,59395144 days agojsonxmlserializationdeserializationjaxb

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

56Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 66 days ago
7.6/36Commit cadence11/52 weeks with commits
13.1/18Commit volume28 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year28
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push66
active_weeks_last_year11
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases93 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 136 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~83.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count93
latest_release_tag3.32.7
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release136
mean_days_between_releases83.6
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?

89Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
54.7/60Stars2,343 stars
23.1/25Forks589 forks
8.7/15Watchers38 watchers
Inputs used
forks589
stars2,343
watchers38
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads2,034,593 downloads/month across packagist
20/20Registry dependents1,025 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesjms/serializer
dependents1,025
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads144,241,928
monthly_downloads2,034,593
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

75Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12.2/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 46% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth100 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 68 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled100
top_contributor_share0.46
How it's scored
34.4/42Issue resolution82% of issues closed
19.1/30PR acceptance538/846 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
10.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 7/10 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
merged_prs538
open_issues135
closed_issues608
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.818
closed_unmerged_prs308
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 backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
21.7/25Owner reach1,044 followers of schmittjoh
25/25Track record85 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,044
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginschmittjoh
public_repos85
account_age_days6,023
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 144 days ago
20/20Version history95 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesjms/serializer
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish144

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

73Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

80Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttp://jmsyst.com/libs/serializer
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikino
homepagehttp://jmsyst.com/libs/serializer
docs_sitehttp://jmsyst.com/libs/serializer
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

53Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 7/10 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 68 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
4/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 8
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
4.5/7.5Vulnerabilities4 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate4.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages1
unassessed_packages32
affected_by_severitynone
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 1 resolved dependencies against OSV. 32 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.

41Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
27.2/40Legible commit history51 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.51
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 practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
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
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePHP without a type-check config
54.9/55Manageable file sizes1/484 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes81,049
source_files_sampled484
oversized_source_files1
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplescookbook
Inputs used
example_dirscookbook
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

2,343GitHub stars
100contributors
28commits, last 12 months
66days since last push
93releases
2bus factor
135open issues
Packagist, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 589 ⇿
0Stars
589Forks
93Releases

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.

010020030040050060056092012-122019-082026-05
Major 3Minor 52Patch 30

Each point covers 13 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.1 / 10
4.1aggregate

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 · 2026-08-03 03:41 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7Code-ReviewFound 7/10 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
10Contributorsproject has 68 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
8SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 8
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
6Vulnerabilities4 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistdoctrine/instantiator^1.3.1 || ^2.0composer.json
Packagistdoctrine/lexer^2.0 || ^3.0composer.json
Packagistjms/metadata^2.6composer.json
All dependencies 33

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 30 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistdoctrine/instantiatordirect
Packagistdoctrine/lexerdirect
Packagistjms/metadatadirect
Packagistdoctrine/annotationsindirect
Packagistdoctrine/coding-standardindirect
Packagistdoctrine/ormindirect
Packagistdoctrine/persistenceindirect
Packagistdoctrine/phpcr-odmindirect
Packagistext-pdo_sqliteindirect
Packagistjackalope/jackalope-doctrine-dbalindirect
Packagistocramius/proxy-managerindirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistphpbench/phpbenchindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpdoc-parserindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstanindirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunitindirect
Packagistpsr/containerindirect
Packagistrector/rectorindirect
Packagistsymfony/clockindirect
Packagistsymfony/dependency-injectionindirect
Packagistsymfony/expression-languageindirect
Packagistsymfony/filesystemindirect
Packagistsymfony/formindirect
Packagistsymfony/translationindirect
Packagistsymfony/uidindirect
Packagistsymfony/validatorindirect
Packagistsymfony/yamlindirect
Packagisttwig/twigindirect
PyPIalabasterindirect
PyPIjinja2indirect
PyPImarkupsafeindirect
PyPIsphinx1.8.5indirect
PyPIsphinx-rtd-themeindirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 1 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 32 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

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 v0.30.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsPackagist.