Public record
Software health reportschema 0.30.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-04 16:32 UTC

silexphp / Pimple

A small PHP dependency injection container

PHPMIT★ 2,667 stars⑂ 302 forkssince Jun 2009View on GitHub ↗

silexphp/Pimple holds a health index of 54 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (77/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (27/100). It was last updated 154 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

54
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.

54
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 53 is calibrated to 54 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

SilexOrganization
20 followers6 public repossince Mar 2013

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagistpimple/pimplev3.6.21,232,59623159 days agodependency-injectioncontainer

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

38Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
9.9/36Push recencylast push 154 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence3/52 weeks with commits
10/18Commit volume12 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_year12
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push154
active_weeks_last_year3
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases23 version tags (no GitHub releases)
27/36Release recencylatest release 159 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~349.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count23
latest_release_tagv3.6.2
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release159
mean_days_between_releases349.4
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?

77Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
55.6/60Stars2,667 stars
20.7/25Forks302 forks
10.9/15Watchers94 watchers
Inputs used
forks302
stars2,667
watchers94
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads1,232,596 downloads/month across packagist
20/20Registry dependents1,662 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagespimple/pimple
dependents1,662
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads135,839,316
monthly_downloads1,232,596
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

63Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6.8/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 70% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth43 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 14 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled43
top_contributor_share0.699
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolutionno issues or no data
14.2/30PR acceptance93/197 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
9/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 10/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
merged_prs93
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio
closed_unmerged_prs104
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
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
9.5/25Owner reach20 followers of silexphp
18.2/25Track record6 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers20
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginsilexphp
public_repos6
account_age_days4,893
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 159 days ago
20/20Version history23 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespimple/pimple
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish159

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

54Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
8/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests5 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
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
10/10Topics4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsphp, pimple, silex, dependency-injection
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?

38Weak · 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
1/2.5CI-Tests5 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 10/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 14 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
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-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate3.8
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.

27At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
19.7/40Legible commit history37 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.37
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-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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 codePHP without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/18 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes19,358
source_files_sampled18
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

2,667GitHub stars
43contributors
12commits, last 12 months
154days since last push
23releases
1bus factor
0open 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 ★ / 302 ⇿
0Stars
302Forks
22Releases

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.

05010015020025030028752009-082017-112026-02
Major 3Minor 8Patch 11

Each point covers 16 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.8 / 10
3.8aggregate

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 · 2026-08-04 16:32 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
4CI-Tests5 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 4
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6Code-ReviewFound 10/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
10Contributorsproject has 14 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
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
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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistpsr/container^1.1 || ^2.0composer.json
All dependencies 3

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 2 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistpsr/containerdirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunitindirect
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 v0.30.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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