Public record
Software health reportschema 0.27.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-01 21:35 UTC

AstarVienna / AnisoCADO

A package to generate off-axis PSFs for the SCAO mode for MICADO at the ELT

PythonGPL-3.0★ 7 stars⑂ 2 forkssince Mar 2019View on GitHub ↗

AstarVienna/AnisoCADO holds a health index of 63 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (73/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (39/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

63
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

63
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 59 is calibrated to 63 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

A*ViennaOrganization
11 followers29 public repossince Mar 2021

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIAnisoCADO0.6.05,368100 days agoastronomy

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

73Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
8.3/36Commit cadence12/52 weeks with commits
16.9/18Commit volume75 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained17 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year75
human_commit_share0.8
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year12
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases6 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~252.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count6
latest_release_tagv0.6.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases252.7

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

39Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
12.6/60Stars7 stars
0/25Forks2 forks
2.7/15Watchers4 watchers
Inputs used
forks2
stars7
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (GPL-3.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
49.7/80Monthly downloads5,368 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesAnisoCADO
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads5,368
unverified_packages_excluded
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

Sustainability & Governance

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

60Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
14/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 38% of commits
6.8/13.5Contributor breadth5 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled5
top_contributor_share0.379
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution0% of issues closed
24.8/30PR acceptance33/40 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 1/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs33
open_issues4
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0
closed_unmerged_prs7
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
7.8/25Owner reach11 followers of AstarVienna
21.4/25Track record29 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers11
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginAstarVienna
public_repos29
account_age_days1,951
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history10 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesAnisoCADO
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

67Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows7 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests7 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikino
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

58Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests7 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 1/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained17 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6.8/7.5Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate4.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories1
affected_packages1
assessed_packages115
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 1
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 115 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.

43Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
17.3/40Legible commit history26 of 80 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.325
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapdocs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance8 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespoetry.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesdocs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.08
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/11 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes37,172
source_files_sampled11
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

7GitHub stars
5contributors
75commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
6releases
2bus factor
4open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:AnisoCADO@0.6.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 2 ⇿
0Stars
2Forks

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.

111222212021-062022-042023-02

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.7 / 10
4.7aggregate

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 · 2026-08-01 21:34 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
4Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests7 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 1/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained17 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPInumpy(>=2.2.6,<3.0.0)pyproject.toml
PyPIastropy(>=7.0.2,<9.0.0)pyproject.toml
PyPImatplotlib(>=3.10.9,<4.0.0)pyproject.toml
All dependencies 115

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 112 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIastropy7.2.0direct
PyPImatplotlib3.11.1direct
PyPInumpy2.3.5direct
PyPIaccessible-pygments0.0.5indirect
PyPIalabaster0.7.16indirect
PyPIappnope0.1.4indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.6.0indirect
PyPIastroid4.0.3indirect
PyPIastropy-iers-data0.2026.2.2.0.48.1indirect
PyPIasttokens3.0.0indirect
PyPIattrs25.3.0indirect
PyPIbabel2.17.0indirect
PyPIbeautifulsoup44.13.4indirect
PyPIblack26.5.1indirect
PyPIcertifi2025.8.3indirect
PyPIcffi1.17.1indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.3indirect
PyPIclick8.2.1indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcomm0.2.3indirect
PyPIcontourpy1.3.3indirect
PyPIcoverage7.15.2indirect
PyPIcycler0.12.1indirect
PyPIdebugpy1.8.16indirect
PyPIdecorator5.2.1indirect
PyPIdill0.4.0indirect
PyPIdocutils0.21.2indirect
PyPIexecuting2.2.0indirect
PyPIfastjsonschema2.21.2indirect
PyPIfonttools4.61.0indirect
PyPIgreenlet3.2.4indirect
PyPIidna3.18indirect
PyPIimagesize1.4.1indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata8.7.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIipykernel6.30.1indirect
PyPIipython9.4.0indirect
PyPIipython-pygments-lexers1.1.1indirect
PyPIisort6.0.1indirect
PyPIjedi0.19.2indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjsonschema4.25.1indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.4.1indirect
PyPIjupyter-cache1.0.1indirect
PyPIjupyter-client8.6.3indirect
PyPIjupyter-core5.8.1indirect
PyPIkiwisolver1.4.9indirect
PyPIlibrt0.13.0indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.2indirect
PyPImatplotlib-inline0.1.7indirect
PyPImccabe0.7.0indirect
PyPImdit-py-plugins0.6.1indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImypy2.3.0indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPImyst-nb1.4.0indirect
PyPImyst-parser5.1.0indirect
PyPInbclient0.10.2indirect
PyPInbformat5.10.4indirect
PyPInest-asyncio1.6.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIparso0.8.5indirect
PyPIpathspec1.0.4indirect
PyPIpbr7.0.0indirect
PyPIpexpect4.9.0indirect
PyPIpillow12.3.0indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.3.8indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIprompt-toolkit3.0.51indirect
PyPIpsutil7.0.0indirect
PyPIptyprocess0.7.0indirect
PyPIpure-eval0.2.3indirect
PyPIpycparser2.22indirect
PyPIpydata-sphinx-theme0.20.0indirect
PyPIpyerfa2.0.1.5indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpylint4.0.6indirect
PyPIpyparsing3.2.3indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpytokens0.4.0indirect
PyPIpywin32311indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIpyzmq27.0.2indirect
PyPIreferencing0.36.2indirect
PyPIrequests2.33.0indirect
PyPIroman-numerals4.1.0indirect
PyPIrpds-py0.27.0indirect
PyPIsetuptools83.0.0indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsnowballstemmer3.0.1indirect
PyPIsoupsieve2.9.1indirect
PyPIsphinx9.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinx-book-theme1.4.0indirect
PyPIsphinx-copybutton0.5.2indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-apidoc0.6.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-applehelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-devhelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-htmlhelp2.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jsmath1.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-mermaid2.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-qthelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-serializinghtml2.0.0indirect
PyPIsqlalchemy2.0.43indirect
PyPIstack-data0.6.3indirect
PyPItabulate0.9.0indirect
PyPItomlkit0.13.3indirect
PyPItornado6.5.7indirect
PyPItraitlets5.14.3indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.14.1indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIwcwidth0.2.13indirect
PyPIzipp3.23.0indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 115 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
click8.2.1indirecthigh18.3.3

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 v0.27.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsPyPI.