Public record
Software health reportschema 0.26.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-22 06:04 UTC

tw2066 / dto

PHPMIT★ 18 stars⑂ 8 forkssince Mar 2021View on GitHub ↗

tw2066/dto holds a health index of 54 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (79/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (29/100). It was last updated today. 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

Mr.tangPersonal account
9 followers57 public repossince Dec 2016

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
Packagisttangwei/dtov3.2.02,1915042 days agodtohyperfhyperf-dtohyperf-swagger

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

79Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
11.1/36Commit cadence16/52 weeks with commits
16.6/18Commit volume70 commits in the last year
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained8 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
commits_last_year70
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year16
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases49 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 42 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~62.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count49
latest_release_tagv3.2.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release42
mean_days_between_releases62.6
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
20/60Stars18 stars
7/25Forks8 forks
0/15Watchers2 watchers
Inputs used
forks8
stars18
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonbelow_threshold
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_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
44.5/80Monthly downloads2,191 downloads/month across packagist
3.2/20Registry dependents2 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagestangwei/dto
dependents2
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads139,853
monthly_downloads2,191
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

52Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth1 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
12.9/30PR acceptance3/7 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs3
open_issues0
closed_issues5
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs4
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
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
7.2/25Owner reach9 followers of tw2066
24.8/25Track record57 public repos, account ~9 yr old
Inputs used
followers9
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_logintw2066
public_repos57
account_age_days3,506
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 42 days ago
20/20Version history50 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagestangwei/dto
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish42

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

60Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.php-cs-fixer.php, phpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
10/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests1 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionno

Security

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

33At Risk · 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
1.2/2.5CI-Tests1 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
4.5/7.5Maintained8 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
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-Permissionsno data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate3.3
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.

29At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
6.4/40Legible commit history12 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.12
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.php-cs-fixer.php, phpstan.neon
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_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 codePHP without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/252 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes8,673
source_files_sampled252
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

18GitHub stars
1contributors
70commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
49releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 18 ★ / 8 ⇿
18Stars
8Forks
39Releases

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.

04812162018742022-022024-032026-03
Major 2Minor 1Patch 26

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.3 / 10
3.3aggregate

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 · 2026-07-22 06:04 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
5CI-Tests1 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
6Maintained8 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6
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 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistnetresearch/jsonmapper~5.0.0composer.json
Packagisthyperf/http-server~3.2.0composer.json
Packagisthyperf/di~3.2.0composer.json
Packagisthyperf/validation~3.2.0composer.json
Packagistnikic/php-parser^4.19|^5.6composer.json
Packagistsymfony/finder^6.0|^7.0composer.json
All dependencies 18

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 6 direct and 12 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagisthyperf/didirect
Packagisthyperf/http-serverdirect
Packagisthyperf/validationdirect
Packagistnetresearch/jsonmapperdirect
Packagistnikic/php-parserdirect
Packagistsymfony/finderdirect
Packagistbrick/mathindirect
Packagistfriendsofphp/php-cs-fixerindirect
Packagisthyperf/databaseindirect
Packagisthyperf/laminas-mimeindirect
Packagistmockery/mockeryindirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistphpdocumentor/reflection-docblockindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstanindirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunitindirect
Packagistsymfony/property-accessindirect
Packagistsymfony/serializerindirect
Packagistsymfony/var-dumperindirect
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 v0.26.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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