Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-21 00:49 UTC

AlecAivazis / survey

A golang library for building interactive and accessible prompts with full support for windows and posix terminals.

GoMIT★ 4,100 stars⑂ 350 forkssince Oct 2016archivedView on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

AlecAivazis/survey holds a health index of 19 out of 100, placing it in the Critical band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (76/100) and lowest on Vitality (21/100). The repository is archived, so no further maintenance is expected.

19
overall / 100
Critical

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.

19
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 51 is calibrated to 51 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Alec AivazisPersonal account
198 followers82 public repossince Jul 2011

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 publish
Gogithub.com/AlecAivazis/survey/v2v2.3.7-361412 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

21At Risk · 21% of overall
How it's scored
0/36Push recency — last push 926 days ago
0/36Commit cadence — 0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume — 0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — project is archived
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push926
active_weeks_last_year0
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 71 releases published
0/36Release recency — latest release 1,225 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~76.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count71
latest_release_tagv2.3.7
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1,225
mean_days_between_releases76.8
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?

76Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
58.6/60Stars — 4,100 stars
21.2/25Forks — 350 forks
2.7/15Watchers — 4 watchers
Inputs used
forks350
stars4,100
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges1
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

61Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6.8/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 70% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 62 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled62
top_contributor_share0.696
How it's scored
32.4/42Issue resolution — 77% of issues closed
24.2/30PR acceptance — 174/216 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
10.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 23/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
merged_prs174
open_issues61
closed_issues205
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.771
closed_unmerged_prs42
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
16.5/25Owner reach — 198 followers of AlecAivazis
25/25Track record — 82 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers198
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginAlecAivazis
public_repos82
account_age_days5,577
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go
4/35Publish recency — latest publish 1,412 days ago
20/20Version history — 36 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/AlecAivazis/survey/v2
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish1,412

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

49Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 7 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscli, interactive, prompt, golang, command-line, windows, unix
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

47Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5.2/7.5Code-Review — Found 23/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — project is archived
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
4.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 4 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate3.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
26.6/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: golang.org/x/text 0.4.0 (unknown)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
37.2/40No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 98 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories2
affected_packages1
assessed_packages11
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityunknown 1
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 11 resolved dependencies against OSV. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. Reachability is not analyzed.

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.

64Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 78 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.78
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — go.mod (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/72 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes23,608
source_files_sampled72
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

4,100GitHub stars
62contributors
0commits, last 12 months
926days since last push
71releases
1bus factor
61open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 350 ⇿
0Stars
350Forks
71Releases

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.

012525037532762016-112021-102026-10
Major 1Minor 10Patch 57

Each point covers 10 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.8 / 10
3.8aggregate

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 · 2026-10-21 00:49 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
0CI-Tests0 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7Code-ReviewFound 23/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject is archived
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6Vulnerabilities4 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 9
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/Netflix/go-expectv0.0.0-20220104043353-73e0943537d2go.mod
Gogithub.com/creack/ptyv1.1.17go.mod
Gogithub.com/hinshun/vt10xv0.0.0-20220119200601-820417d04eecgo.mod
Gogithub.com/kballard/go-shellquotev0.0.0-20180428030007-95032a82bc51go.mod
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-isattyv0.0.8go.mod
Gogithub.com/mgutz/ansiv0.0.0-20170206155736-9520e82c474bgo.mod
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testifyv1.6.1go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/termv0.0.0-20210927222741-03fcf44c2211go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/textv0.4.0go.mod
All dependencies 11

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 9 direct and 2 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/creack/pty1.1.17direct
Gogithub.com/hinshun/vt10x0.0.0-20220119200601-820417d04eecdirect
Gogithub.com/kballard/go-shellquote0.0.0-20180428030007-95032a82bc51direct
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-isatty0.0.8direct
Gogithub.com/mgutz/ansi0.0.0-20170206155736-9520e82c474bdirect
Gogithub.com/netflix/go-expect0.0.0-20220104043353-73e0943537d2direct
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testify1.6.1direct
Gogolang.org/x/term0.0.0-20210927222741-03fcf44c2211direct
Gogolang.org/x/text0.4.0direct
Gogithub.com/davecgh/go-spew1.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-colorable0.1.2indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 11 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
golang.org/x/text0.4.0directunknown20.41.0

An advisory means the version recorded in the dependency graph falls inside an advisory’s affected range. Reachability is not analysed, and the graph includes development and test pins — a finding may concern tooling rather than shipped software.

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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — Go.