# techdivision/import-cli-simple — health index 56/100 (Moderate)

> Inspection of the public repository techdivision/import-cli-simple by inspect.software. It holds a health index of 56 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. The index is a signal derived from publicly visible practice, not a warranty, a security audit, or an endorsement, and it is independent of payment.

- Repository: https://github.com/techdivision/import-cli-simple
- Report page: https://inspect.software/software/techdivision/import-cli-simple
- Full JSON report: https://inspect.software/api/repositories/techdivision/import-cli-simple/report
- Badge: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inspect-software/badges/main/v1/t/techdivision/import-cli-simple.svg
- Inspected: 2026-07-15
- Methodology: metrics 1.13.0, report schema 0.11.0 (https://inspect.software/methodology.md)

## Category summary

| Category | Weight | Index | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitality | 22% | 58/100 | Moderate |
| Community & Adoption | 18% | 49/100 | At risk |
| Sustainability & Governance | 24% | 64/100 | Moderate |
| Engineering Quality | 20% | 68/100 | Moderate |
| Security | 16% | 31/100 | At risk |
| AI Readiness | not counted | 61/100 | Moderate |

## Repository facts

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Description | This the meta package for Pacemaker Community, a Symfony based CLI application that provides import functionality for products, categories, attributes, and attribute-sets. The default format is CSV, adapters for XML are also available. The application can be declaratively extended by additional operations, which can be used to reassemble and execute the existing functionalities according to project-specific requirements. But also completely new commands can be integrated quickly and easily via dependency injection. |
| Homepage | https://pacemaker.techdivision.com |
| Primary language | PHP |
| License | MIT |
| Stars | 70 |
| Forks | 18 |
| Created | 2016-12-09 |
| Last push | 2026-07-15 |
| Latest release | 5.1.0 |
| Commits (last year) | 9 |
| Bus factor | 1 |
| Topics | magento, import, products, categories, csv, commandline, attributes, pacemaker, cli |

## Published packages

| Registry | Package | Latest | Monthly downloads |
|---|---|---|---|
| packagist | techdivision/import-cli-simple | 5.2.0 | 3,065 |

## Vitality — 58/100 (Moderate)

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping? Weight: 22% of the overall index.

### Development activity — 52/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push recency | met | 36 / 36 | last push 0 days ago |
| Commit cadence | partial | 5.5 / 36 | 8/52 weeks with commits |
| Commit volume | partial | 9 / 18 | 9 commits in the last year |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained | partial | 1 / 10 | 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1 |

### Release discipline — 67/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ships releases | met | 27 / 27 | 100 releases published |
| Release recency | partial | 27 / 36 | latest release 106 days ago |
| Release cadence | partial | 12.6 / 27 | a release every ~147.3 days |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases | not met | 0 / 10 | Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases. |

### Abandonment — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project is still maintained | met | 100 / 100 | maintenance record not established from the collected data |

## Community & Adoption — 49/100 (At risk)

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors? Weight: 18% of the overall index.

### Popularity & adoption — 47/100 (At risk)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stars | partial | 29.8 / 60 | 70 stars |
| Forks | partial | 10.3 / 25 | 18 forks |
| Watchers | partial | 7 / 15 | 19 watchers |

### Community health — 50/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | — |
| License | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | recognized license (MIT) |
| CONTRIBUTING guide | not met | 0 / 18 | — |
| Code of conduct | not met | 0 / 13.5 | — |
| Issue template | not met | 0 / 7.2 | — |
| PR template | not met | 0 / 6.3 | — |

### Ecosystem adoption (downloads) — 50/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly downloads | partial | 46.5 / 80 | 3,065 downloads/month across packagist |
| Registry dependents | partial | 3.2 / 20 | 2 packages depend on it |

## Sustainability & Governance — 64/100 (Moderate)

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep? Weight: 24% of the overall index.

### Maintainer resilience (bus factor) — 36/100 (At risk)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bus factor | partial | 9 / 54 | 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| Commit distribution | partial | 3.7 / 22.5 | top contributor authored 83% of commits |
| Contributor breadth | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | 11 contributors |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors | met | 10 / 10 | project has 7 contributing companies or organizations |

### Issue & PR responsiveness — 70/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issue resolution | partial | 32.4 / 46.8 | 69% of issues closed |
| PR acceptance | partial | 37.9 / 38.2 | 226/228 decided PRs merged |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review | not met | 0 / 15 | Found 1/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |

### Ownership & stewardship — 64/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership backing | met | 30 / 30 | organization-owned |
| Verified domain | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Owner reach | partial | 9 / 25 | 17 followers of techdivision |
| Track record | met | 25 / 25 | 133 public repos, account ~13 yr old |

### Package maintenance — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published & resolvable | met | 25 / 25 | 1 package(s) on packagist |
| Publish recency | met | 35 / 35 | latest publish 59 days ago |
| Version history | met | 20 / 20 | 307 published versions |
| Not deprecated | met | 20 / 20 | active, not deprecated or yanked |

## Engineering Quality — 68/100 (Moderate)

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place? Weight: 20% of the overall index.

### Engineering practices — 64/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| CI workflows | met | 24 / 24 | 1 workflow(s) |
| Tests present | met | 24 / 24 | — |
| Linter config | met | 16 / 16 | phpcs.xml, phpstan.neon |
| Pre-commit hooks | not met | 0 / 9.6 | — |
| .editorconfig | not met | 0 / 6.4 | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests | not met | 0 / 20 | 0 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0 |

### Documentation — 75/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 30 / 30 | — |
| Documentation directory | not met | 0 / 25 | — |
| Documentation / homepage site | met | 15 / 15 | https://pacemaker.techdivision.com |
| Repository description | met | 10 / 10 | — |
| Topics | met | 10 / 10 | 9 topics |
| Wiki | met | 10 / 10 | — |

## Security — 31/100 (At risk)

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, with no malicious dependency and no unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure? Weight: 16% of the overall index.

### Security posture — 31/100 (At risk)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binary-Artifacts | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | no binaries found in the repo |
| Branch-Protection | not met | 0 / 7.5 | branch protection not enabled on development/release branches |
| CI-Tests | not met | 0 / 2.5 | 0 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0 |
| CII-Best-Practices | not met | 0 / 2.5 | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| Code-Review | not met | 0 / 7.5 | Found 1/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| Contributors | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | project has 7 contributing companies or organizations |
| Dangerous-Workflow | met | 10 / 10 | no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| Dependency-Update-Tool | not met | 0 / 7.5 | no update tool detected |
| Fuzzing | not met | 0 / 5 | project is not fuzzed |
| License | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | license file detected |
| Maintained | partial | 0.8 / 7.5 | 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1 |
| Packaging | excluded | 0 / 5 | packaging workflow not detected |
| Pinned-Dependencies | not met | 0 / 5 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0 |
| SAST | not met | 0 / 5 | SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0 |
| Security-Policy | not met | 0 / 5 | security policy file not detected |
| Signed-Releases | not met | 0 / 7.5 | Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases. |
| Token-Permissions | not met | 0 / 7.5 | detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| Vulnerabilities | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | 0 existing vulnerabilities detected |

### High-Risk Jurisdiction Exposure — 100/100 (Excellent)

Only high-confidence self-published location evidence affects this multiplier. Ambiguous matches are review-only; country evidence is not proof of nationality, citizenship, legal registration, malicious intent, or sanctions status.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Policy exposure multiplier | met | 100 / 100 | no confirmed policy-scope location match |

## AI Readiness — 61/100 (Moderate)

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? An independent, experimental badge — weight 0.0, so it is surfaced on its own and does not affect the overall health score.

### Agent context & guidance — 75/100 (Good)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent instructions | met | 45 / 45 | AGENTS.md |
| Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) | not met | 0 / 15 | — |
| Legible commit history | excluded | 0 / 40 | no data |

### Verify loop (build / test / typecheck) — 52/100 (Moderate)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| One-command bootstrap | not met | 0 / 18 | — |
| Automated tests | met | 22 / 22 | — |
| Lint / format config | met | 11 / 11 | phpcs.xml, phpstan.neon |
| Static type checking | not met | 0 / 11 | — |
| Reproducible environment | met | 10 / 10 | lockfile |
| Demonstrated agent practice | excluded | 0 / 10 | no data |
| Automated maintenance | excluded | 0 / 8 | no data |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies | not met | 0 / 10 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0 |

### Code legibility for models — 55/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type-checkable code | not met | 0 / 45 | PHP without a type-check config |
| Manageable file sizes | met | 55 / 55 | 0/23 source files over 60KB |

## What this report is

inspect.software measures public repositories against a single published, versioned methodology and reports the result as a 1–100 health index. Findings are signals derived from what is visible in public repository data — they are not a security audit, a warranty, or an endorsement, and no result depends on payment.

- Methodology, formulas and weights: https://inspect.software/methodology.md
- What a result does and does not claim: https://inspect.software/wiki/signals-not-warranties.md
- Rating bands: https://inspect.software/wiki/scoring-bands.md
- Corrections: https://inspect.software/contact.md
- Index of all documents: https://inspect.software/llms.txt