Package Health

lolli42/finediff

MIT licensing and only two runtime requirements keep adoption straightforward. The small project has no security policy or scanning, and both workflow actions are unpinned.

Latest 1.1.2PackagistPackagist

78%

Total Score

Maintainer Stability
Maintainer Stability
Assesses the consistency and reliability of package maintainers

50

Dependencies
Dependencies
Evaluates the health and security of package dependencies

100

Maturity
Maturity
Indicates package age, release frequency, and adoption metrics

94

Supply Chain
Supply Chain
Evaluates supply chain security practices and risks

75

Health Score Breakdown

Repo commit activitycaution

There were no commits and no active maintainers in the last three months, which is a modest maintenance concern, although the recent release and repository push provide compensating evidence.

Repo toolingcaution

Composer build tooling is present, but no security scanning tools were detected; this is a transparency and hygiene gap rather than evidence of unsafe code.

Security policycaution

The repository has no security policy, leaving vulnerability-reporting and response expectations undocumented for consumers.

Workflow auditcaution

The single workflow was fully analyzed with no dangerous triggers, sinks, or audit findings, but both of its two action references are unpinned, weakening build reproducibility.

Vulnerabilities

We didn't find any vulnerabilities for this package.

Package versions

Maintainers

Raymond Hill
Rob Crowe
Christian Kuhn

Direct Dependencies

No direct dependencies.

Weekly Downloads

Info

Last Published
11 months ago
Created
13 years ago

Are You Affected?

Connect your repositories to instantly see whether vulnerable or malicious packages exist in your codebase.

Free. No credit card required.

Aikido Platform