neos/seo

Usable with caveats: it has a long release history, a current stable release, clear licensing, and organization backing. However, the repository had no commits or active maintainers in the last three months, with no recent issue or pull-request activity, so maintenance should be verified before relying on it heavily.

Latest 4.2.1

Packagist

68%

Total Score

Maintainer Stability

Dependencies

100

Maturity

Supply Chain

Health Score Breakdown

Repo commit activity

There were zero commits and zero active maintainers in the last three months. This is the main adoption concern because the current release history does not compensate for the lack of recent source activity.

Repo issue activity

The repository has 19 open issues but no new or closed issues and no pull-request activity in the last month. That weakens evidence of active maintenance, although an open issue count alone does not establish abandonment.

Repo tooling

The repository uses Composer, but no security scanning tools were detected. This is a transparency and maintenance-process gap, though it is not by itself evidence that the package is unsafe.

Token permissions

The one workflow lacks top-level token permissions, so its allowed GitHub token access is not explicitly constrained at the workflow level. No write-enabled workflow was detected, limiting the severity but leaving a hygiene gap.