Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-20 05:48 UTC

spryker-eco / algolia

Algolia adapter for Spryker search.

PHPCustom license★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Jan 2026View on GitHub ↗

spryker-eco/algolia holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (84/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (36/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

71
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.

71
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 63 is calibrated to 71 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

spryker-ecoOrganization
9 followers63 public repossince Jan 2017

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Packagistspryker-eco/algolia2.1.322,093144 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

80Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 4 days ago
9.7/36Commit cadence — 14/52 weeks with commits
16.4/18Commit volume — 66 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_year66
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year14

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 14 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 4 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~12.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count14
latest_release_tag2.1.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release4
mean_days_between_releases12.6
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?

40Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 0 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5License — license file present, not a recognized license
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesposer.pugx.org, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
57.9/80Monthly downloads — 22,093 downloads/month across packagist
2/20Registry dependents — 1 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesspryker-eco/algolia
dependents1
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads131,562
monthly_downloads22,093
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

61Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3.1/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 86% of commits
8.1/13.5Contributor breadth — 6 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled6
top_contributor_share0.864
How it's scored
21/42Issue resolution — 50% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance — 13/13 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs13
open_issues1
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d4
prs_decided_30d4
issue_closed_ratio0.5
closed_unmerged_prs0
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
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
7.2/25Owner reach — 9 followers of spryker-eco
25/25Track record — 63 public repos, account ~9 yr old
Inputs used
followers9
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginspryker-eco
public_repos63
account_age_days3,566

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 4 days ago
20/20Version history — 14 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesspryker-eco/algolia
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish4

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

84Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — phpcs.xml, phpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

50Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 11 out of 11 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
7.5/7.5Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5License — 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_aggregate5
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.

36Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.spryker.com/llms.txt)
9.7/40Legible commit history — 12 of 66 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://docs.spryker.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.182
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — phpcs.xml, phpstan.neon
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 66
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
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
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/188 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes19,244
source_files_sampled188
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

0GitHub stars
6contributors
66commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
14releases
1bus factor
1open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.0 / 10
5.0aggregate

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 05:47 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense 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 18
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistalgolia/algoliasearch-client-php4.46.3composer.json
Packagistspryker-shop/traceable-event-widget^1.1.0composer.json
Packagistspryker/cms^7.18.0composer.json
Packagistspryker/configuration-extension^1.0.0composer.json
Packagistspryker/customer^7.70.0composer.json
Packagistspryker/event-behavior^1.32.0composer.json
Packagistspryker/http^1.15.0composer.json
Packagistspryker/kernel^3.84.0composer.json
Packagistspryker/locale^4.12.0composer.json
Packagistspryker/log^3.18.0composer.json
Packagistspryker/product^6.53.0composer.json
Packagistspryker/product-category^4.28.1composer.json
Packagistspryker/product-image^3.20.0composer.json
Packagistspryker/publisher-extension^1.0.0composer.json
Packagistspryker/search-extension^1.4.0composer.json
Packagistspryker/search-http^0.5.9composer.json
Packagistspryker/store^1.36.1composer.json
Packagistspryker/symfony^3.19.2composer.json
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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.