Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-05 23:14 UTC

BartolomeoRusso9 / SpotiFLAC-Module-Version

Python module to fetch Spotify track metadata and retrieve matching lossless audio through configurable Tidal, Qobuz, Deezer & Amazon Music providers.

Python · JavaScriptMIT★ 196 stars⑂ 28 forkssince Jan 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryDesktop applicationhow this is determined

BartolomeoRusso9/SpotiFLAC-Module-Version holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (92/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (44/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

86
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

86
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 72 is calibrated to 86 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

BartoloPersonal account
10 followers16 public repossince Mar 2024

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 publishTags
PyPISpotiFLAC3.9.09,8341832 days agospotifyflacdownloadermusiclosslesslossless-musictidalqobuzamazon-musicaudiospotiflacspotify-downloaderno-accounthi-res

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

89Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
23.5/36Commit cadence34/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume1,270 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 14 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year1,270
human_commit_share0.97
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year34
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases77 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 2 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~1.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count77
latest_release_tag3.9.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release2
mean_days_between_releases1.7

Community & Adoption

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

62Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
37.1/60Stars196 stars
11.9/25Forks28 forks
3.9/15Watchers6 watchers
Inputs used
forks28
stars196
watchers6
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges7
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
53.2/80Monthly downloads9,834 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesSpotiFLAC
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads9,834
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
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 80% of commits
10.8/13.5Contributor breadth8 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled8
top_contributor_share0.797
How it's scored
41.2/42Issue resolution98% of issues closed
29/30PR acceptance140/145 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/1 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs140
open_issues1
closed_issues54
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d36
prs_decided_30d37
issue_closed_ratio0.982
closed_unmerged_prs5
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 backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
7.5/25Owner reach10 followers of BartolomeoRusso9
13.9/25Track record16 public repos, account ~2 yr old
Inputs used
followers10
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginBartolomeoRusso9
public_repos16
account_age_days908
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 2 days ago
20/20Version history183 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesSpotiFLAC
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish2

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

92Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configpyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.black])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests1 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://bartolomeorusso9.github.io/SpotiFLAC-Module-Version/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics18 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsmusic-downloader, spotify-downloader, spotify, downloader, modules, python, asyncio, cli-tool, command-line, discord-bot, flac, music-metadata, pip-package, telegrambot, apple-music, deezer, qobuz, tidal
has_wikino
homepagehttps://bartolomeorusso9.github.io/SpotiFLAC-Module-Version/
docs_sitehttps://bartolomeorusso9.github.io/SpotiFLAC-Module-Version/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

61Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests1 out of 1 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 0/1 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 14 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
5/5SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6/7.5Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate5.1

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages42
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the pypi:SpotiFLAC@3.9.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 42 packages. 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.

44Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
7.1/40Legible commit history13 of 97 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.134
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configpyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.black])
11/11Static type checkingSpotiFLAC/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile, lockfile
4/10Demonstrated agent practice2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsSpotiFLAC/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.02
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codePython with type-check config (SpotiFLAC/py.typed)
53.2/55Manageable file sizes7/210 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes259,367
source_files_sampled210
oversized_source_files7

Key facts

196GitHub stars
8contributors
1,270commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
77releases
1bus factor
1open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • pypi download statistics for 'SpotiFLAC' unavailable this scan (stats endpoint failed after retries); adoption may be under-evidenced
  • pypi download figures for SpotiFLAC carried forward from the previous scan (stats endpoint unavailable this scan)

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 28 ⇿
0Stars
28Forks
73Releases

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.

0510152025302822026-032026-062026-09
Major 1Minor 11Patch 61
OpenSSF Scorecard 5.1 / 10
5.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-05 23:14 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests1 out of 1 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 0/1 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 14 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 15
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIhttpx>=0.27.0pyproject.toml
PyPImutagen>=1.47.0pyproject.toml
PyPIPillow>=12.3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpydantic>=2.7.0pyproject.toml
PyPIcryptography>=50.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpycryptodome>=3.20.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpackaging>=23.0pyproject.toml
PyPIyt-dlp>=2026.7.4pyproject.toml
PyPItqdm>=4.66.3pyproject.toml
PyPIpywebview>=5.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIaiofiles>=23.2.1pyproject.toml
PyPItenacity>=8.3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-dotenv>=1.2.2pyproject.toml
PyPIrequests>=2.33.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpydoll-python>=2.9.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 140

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 30 direct and 110 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaiofilesdirect
PyPIaiofiles25.1.0direct
PyPIcryptographydirect
PyPIcryptography50.0.1direct
PyPIhttpxdirect
PyPIhttpx0.28.1direct
PyPImutagendirect
PyPImutagen1.48.1direct
PyPIpackagingdirect
PyPIpackaging26.3direct
PyPIpillowdirect
PyPIpillow12.3.0direct
PyPIpycryptodomedirect
PyPIpycryptodome3.23.0direct
PyPIpydanticdirect
PyPIpydantic2.13.5direct
PyPIpydoll-pythondirect
PyPIpydoll-python2.26.0direct
PyPIpython-dotenvdirect
PyPIpython-dotenv1.2.3direct
PyPIpywebviewdirect
PyPIpywebview6.2.1direct
PyPIrequestsdirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2direct
PyPItenacitydirect
PyPItenacity9.1.4direct
PyPItqdmdirect
PyPItqdm4.70.0direct
PyPIyt-dlpdirect
PyPIyt-dlp2026.8.19direct
PyPIaiohappyeyeballs2.7.1indirect
PyPIaiohttp3.14.3indirect
PyPIaiosignal1.4.0indirect
PyPIannotated-doc0.0.5indirect
PyPIannotated-types0.8.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.14.2indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.8.0indirect
PyPIasync-timeout5.0.1indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIaudioop-lts0.2.2indirect
PyPIaudioread3.1.0indirect
PyPIblackindirect
PyPIblack26.5.1indirect
PyPIbottle0.13.4indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.7.22indirect
PyPIcffi2.1.1indirect
PyPIcfgv3.5.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.5.1indirect
PyPIclick8.5.0indirect
PyPIclr-loader0.3.1indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverage7.16.0indirect
PyPIdecorator5.3.1indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.3indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIfastapiindirect
PyPIfastapi0.141.1indirect
PyPIfilelock3.32.4indirect
PyPIfrozenlist1.8.0indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIh24.4.1indirect
PyPIhpack4.2.0indirect
PyPIhttpcore1.0.9indirect
PyPIhttptools0.8.0indirect
PyPIhyperframe6.1.0indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.19indirect
PyPIidna3.19indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIjoblib1.5.3indirect
PyPIlazy-loader0.5indirect
PyPIlibrosa0.11.0indirect
PyPIlibrosa1.0.0indirect
PyPIlibrt0.15.0indirect
PyPIllvmlite0.49.0indirect
PyPImsgpack1.2.2indirect
PyPImultidict6.7.1indirect
PyPImypyindirect
PyPImypy2.3.1indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPInarwhals2.25.0indirect
PyPInodeenv1.10.0indirect
PyPInumba0.67.0indirect
PyPInumpy2.2.6indirect
PyPInumpy2.4.6indirect
PyPInumpy2.5.2indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.11.5indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpooch1.9.0indirect
PyPIpre-commitindirect
PyPIpre-commit4.6.2indirect
PyPIpropcache0.5.2indirect
PyPIproxy-tools0.1.0indirect
PyPIpyacoustid1.3.1indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.46.5indirect
PyPIpygments2.21.0indirect
PyPIpyobjc-core12.2.2indirect
PyPIpyobjc-framework-cocoa12.2.2indirect
PyPIpyobjc-framework-quartz12.2.2indirect
PyPIpyobjc-framework-security12.2.2indirect
PyPIpyobjc-framework-uniformtypeidentifiers12.2.2indirect
PyPIpyobjc-framework-webkit12.2.2indirect
PyPIpytestindirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-covindirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpytest-httpxindirect
PyPIpytest-httpx0.36.2indirect
PyPIpython-discovery1.6.0indirect
PyPIpythonnet3.1.0indirect
PyPIpytokens0.4.1indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIqtpy2.4.3indirect
PyPIruffindirect
PyPIruff0.16.5indirect
PyPIscikit-learn1.7.2indirect
PyPIscikit-learn1.9.0indirect
PyPIscipy1.15.3indirect
PyPIscipy1.17.1indirect
PyPIscipy1.18.1indirect
PyPIsoundfile0.14.0indirect
PyPIsoxr1.1.0indirect
PyPIspotiflac3.8.0indirect
PyPIstandard-aifc3.13.0indirect
PyPIstandard-chunk3.13.0indirect
PyPIstandard-sunau3.13.0indirect
PyPIstarlette1.6.0indirect
PyPIthreadpoolctl3.6.0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.4indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIuvicornindirect
PyPIuvicorn0.52.4indirect
PyPIuvloop0.22.1indirect
PyPIvirtualenv21.7.7indirect
PyPIwatchfiles1.2.0indirect
PyPIwebsockets16.1.1indirect
PyPIyarl1.24.5indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:SpotiFLAC@3.9.0 pulls in 42 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

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 statisticsPyPI.