Public record
Software health reportschema 0.27.0 · metrics 2.5.0 · 2026-07-29 05:04 UTC

spatie / laravel-sitemap

Create and generate sitemaps with ease

PHPMIT★ 2,617 stars⑂ 298 forkssince Aug 2016View on GitHub ↗

spatie/laravel-sitemap holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (81/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (38/100). 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

SpatieOrganization
3,805 followers524 public repossince May 2014

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagistspatie/laravel-sitemap8.2.0697,9228234 days agospatielaravel-sitemap

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

71Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 30 days ago
9/36Commit cadence — 13/52 weeks with commits
14.9/18Commit volume — 45 commits in the last year
4/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
commits_last_year45
human_commit_share0.78
days_since_last_push30
active_weeks_last_year13
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 81 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 34 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~57 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count81
latest_release_tag8.2.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release34
mean_days_between_releases57
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?

81Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
55.4/60Stars — 2,617 stars
20.6/25Forks — 298 forks
8.4/15Watchers — 33 watchers
Inputs used
forks298
stars2,617
watchers33
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
77.9/80Monthly downloads — 697,922 downloads/month across packagist
14/20Registry dependents — 126 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesspatie/laravel-sitemap
dependents126
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads17,254,184
monthly_downloads697,922

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 factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
7.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 66% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 78 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled78
top_contributor_share0.657
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
19.6/30PR acceptance — 149/228 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs149
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio
closed_unmerged_prs79
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, newcomer_pr_acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 3,805 followers of spatie
25/25Track record — 524 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers3,805
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginspatie
public_repos524
account_age_days4,463

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 34 days ago
20/20Version history — 82 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesspatie/laravel-sitemap
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish34

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 7 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://spatie.be/docs/laravel-sitemap
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicslaravel, php, sitemap, google, seo, xml
has_wikino
homepagehttps://spatie.be/docs/laravel-sitemap
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

47Weak · 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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 7 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 1/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
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
3/7.5Maintained — 5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
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 — no data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate4.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): dangerous_workflow, packaging, pinned_dependencies, signed_releases, 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.

38Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
21.9/40Legible commit history — 32 of 78 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
legible_history_share0.41
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
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 6 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 15 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.06
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.15
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
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/34 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes12,682
source_files_sampled34
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

2,617GitHub stars
78contributors
45commits, last 12 months
30days since last push
81releases
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 ★ / 298 ⇿
0Stars
298Forks
79Releases

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.

05010015020025030029152016-082021-072026-06
Major 6Minor 26Patch 46

Each point covers 9 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.7 / 10
4.7aggregate

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 · 2026-07-29 05:04 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests7 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 1/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
4Maintained5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 4
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistilluminate/support^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistnesbot/carbon^2.71|^3.0composer.json
Packagistspatie/crawler^9.0composer.json
Packagistspatie/laravel-package-tools^1.16.1composer.json
All dependencies 14

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 10 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistilluminate/supportdirect
Packagistnesbot/carbondirect
Packagistspatie/crawlerdirect
Packagistspatie/laravel-package-toolsdirect
Packagistlarastan/larastanindirect
Packagistlaravel/pintindirect
Packagistorchestra/testbenchindirect
Packagistpestphp/pestindirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistphpstan/extension-installerindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-deprecation-rulesindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-phpunitindirect
Packagistspatie/pest-plugin-snapshotsindirect
Packagistspatie/temporary-directoryindirect
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

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 v2.5.0, schema v0.27.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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