ju1ius/luigi

Its MIT licensing, small dependency surface, and repository test suite make the code easy to evaluate. The CI workflow leaves all four actions unpinned and the project has no security policy, adding maintenance friction.

Latest 1.0

Packagist

55%

Total Score

Maintainer Stability

Dependencies

100

Maturity

Supply Chain

Health Score Breakdown

Release history

This package has had only one release, published about three and a half years ago, with no releases in the last 12 months. That makes ongoing maintenance uncertain despite the stable 1.0 version.

Repo commit activity

There were no commits and no active maintainers in the last three months, consistent with a project whose only release was about three and a half years ago. This is the main abandonment concern.

Repo tooling

Composer build tooling is present, which supports reproducible project use. No security-scanning tooling is configured, leaving a modest transparency and maintenance gap.

Security policy

The repository has no security policy, so users have no documented reporting or response process. This is a maintenance and transparency gap, though not severe by itself.

Workflow audit

The single workflow was fully analyzed with no dangerous triggers, untrusted checkouts, or audit findings. All four action references are unpinned, however, which weakens build reproducibility and update control.