lion/route

This release appears healthy and suitable for dependency use: it has a stable v13 release, a five-year history with 73 releases and nine releases in the last 12 months, current repository activity, tests, changelog and README coverage, a matching organization-owned repository, and security tooling. The main concern is maintenance concentration: only one contributor made the two commits in the last three months, while the repository also lacks a security policy and does not declare top-level workflow token permissions. These are meaningful hygiene and continuity gaps, but they are moderated by the organization backing, active release cadence, merged pull requests, and otherwise solid project structure.

Latest v13.1.5

Packagist

82%

Total Score

Maintainer Stability

Dependencies

100

Maturity

Supply Chain

Health Score Breakdown

Repo bus factor

All two recent commits came from a single contributor, creating a continuity risk; organization backing partially compensates because maintenance can potentially be handed off within the organization.

Repo commit activity

There were two commits in the last three months from one active maintainer, showing recent work but relatively low recent commit volume.

Repo popularity

The repository has only 1 star, 0 forks, and 1 watcher, indicating limited external adoption; this is supporting caution rather than a verdict because the package otherwise shows active maintenance and coherent structure.

Security policy

No SECURITY.md or equivalent security policy was found, leaving vulnerability-reporting guidance less transparent than ideal.

Token permissions

The one workflow lacks top-level token permissions and uses job-level permissions only; there are no top-level write permissions, so this is a workflow-hygiene gap rather than a severe excessive-permission finding.