Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-08 15:50 UTC

DanBeranek / desssign

PythonMIT★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Feb 2024View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

DanBeranek/desssign holds a health index of 25 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (80/100) and lowest on Vitality (28/100). It was last updated 646 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

25
overall / 100
At Risk

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.

25
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 44 is calibrated to 41 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Daniel BeranekPersonal account
4 followers16 public repossince Sep 2022

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
PyPIdesssign0.0.142914704 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

28At Risk · 21% of overall

Development activity

1Critical
How it's scored
0/36Push recency — last push 646 days ago
0/36Commit cadence — 0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume — 0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share0.94
days_since_last_push646
active_weeks_last_year0

Release discipline

68Good
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 14 releases published
7.2/36Release recency — latest release 704 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~2.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count14
latest_release_tagv0.0.14
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release704
mean_days_between_releases2.3
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?

36Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

1Critical
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 0 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges12
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io, sonarcloud.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

25At Risk
How it's scored
19.7/80Monthly downloads — 29 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesdesssign
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads29
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?

34At Risk · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

10Critical
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1

Issue & PR responsiveness

22At Risk
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — 0% of issues closed
19/30PR acceptance — 26/41 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs26
open_issues1
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0
closed_unmerged_prs15
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.

Ownership & stewardship

40Weak
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
5/25Owner reach — 4 followers of DanBeranek
16.9/25Track record — 16 public repos, account ~3 yr old
Inputs used
followers4
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginDanBeranek
public_repos16
account_age_days1,452
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

79Good
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
14/35Publish recency — latest publish 704 days ago
20/20Version history — 14 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesdesssign
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish704

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

80Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

80Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://DanBeranek.github.io/desssign
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://DanBeranek.github.io/desssign
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionno

Security

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

44Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

30At Risk
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 6 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
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 49 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages15
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:desssign@0.0.14 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 15 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.

57Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

14Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
13.6/40Legible commit history — 24 of 94 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.255
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

80Excellent
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — docs/Makefile, noxfile.py
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checking — src/desssign/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 6 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespoetry.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesdocs/Makefile, noxfile.py
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configssrc/desssign/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.06

Code legibility for models

82Excellent
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (src/desssign/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/57 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes17,926
source_files_sampled57
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

0GitHub stars
1contributors
0commits, last 12 months
646days since last push
14releases
1bus factor
1open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.0 / 10
3.0aggregate

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 · 2026-09-08 15:49 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/6 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
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0Vulnerabilities49 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 5
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIclick>=8.0.1pyproject.toml
PyPInumpy^1.26.4pyproject.toml
PyPIaenum^3.1.15pyproject.toml
PyPIframesss>=0.0.8, <1.0.1pyproject.toml
PyPImatplotlib^3.9.2pyproject.toml
All dependencies 99

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 94 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaenum3.1.15direct
PyPIclick8.1.7direct
PyPIframesss0.0.12direct
PyPImatplotlib3.9.2direct
PyPInumpy1.26.4direct
PyPIalabaster0.7.16indirect
PyPIanyio4.6.0indirect
PyPIasttokens2.4.1indirect
PyPIbabel2.16.0indirect
PyPIbeautifulsoup44.12.3indirect
PyPIblack24.8.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2024.8.30indirect
PyPIcfgv3.4.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.3.2indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcontourpy1.3.0indirect
PyPIcoverage7.6.1indirect
PyPIcycler0.12.1indirect
PyPIdarglint1.8.1indirect
PyPIdecorator5.1.1indirect
PyPIdistlib0.3.8indirect
PyPIdocutils0.21.2indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.2.2indirect
PyPIexecuting2.1.0indirect
PyPIfilelock3.16.1indirect
PyPIfonttools4.53.1indirect
PyPIfuro2024.8.6indirect
PyPIh110.14.0indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.1indirect
PyPIidna3.10indirect
PyPIimagesize1.4.1indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata8.5.0indirect
PyPIimportlib-resources6.4.5indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.0.0indirect
PyPIipython8.18.1indirect
PyPIjedi0.19.1indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.4indirect
PyPIkiwisolver1.4.7indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py3.0.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe2.1.5indirect
PyPImatplotlib-inline0.1.7indirect
PyPImdit-py-plugins0.4.2indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImypy1.11.2indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.0.0indirect
PyPImyst-parser3.0.1indirect
PyPInodeenv1.9.1indirect
PyPIpackaging24.1indirect
PyPIparso0.8.4indirect
PyPIpathspec0.12.1indirect
PyPIpexpect4.9.0indirect
PyPIpillow10.4.0indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.3.6indirect
PyPIpluggy1.5.0indirect
PyPIpre-commit3.8.0indirect
PyPIpre-commit-hooks4.6.0indirect
PyPIprompt-toolkit3.0.47indirect
PyPIptyprocess0.7.0indirect
PyPIpure-eval0.2.3indirect
PyPIpygments2.18.0indirect
PyPIpyparsing3.1.4indirect
PyPIpytest8.3.3indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.2indirect
PyPIrequests2.32.3indirect
PyPIruamel-yaml0.18.6indirect
PyPIruamel-yaml-clib0.2.8indirect
PyPIruff0.6.7indirect
PyPIscipy1.13.1indirect
PyPIsix1.16.0indirect
PyPIsniffio1.3.1indirect
PyPIsnowballstemmer2.2.0indirect
PyPIsoupsieve2.6indirect
PyPIsphinx7.4.7indirect
PyPIsphinx-autobuild2024.9.19indirect
PyPIsphinx-autodoc-typehints2.3.0indirect
PyPIsphinx-basic-ng1.0.0b2indirect
PyPIsphinx-click6.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-applehelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-devhelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-htmlhelp2.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jsmath1.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-qthelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-serializinghtml2.0.0indirect
PyPIstack-data0.6.3indirect
PyPIstarlette0.38.6indirect
PyPItokenize-rt6.0.0indirect
PyPItomli2.0.1indirect
PyPItraitlets5.14.3indirect
PyPItypeguard4.3.0indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.12.2indirect
PyPIurllib32.2.3indirect
PyPIuvicorn0.30.6indirect
PyPIvirtualenv20.26.5indirect
PyPIwatchfiles0.24.0indirect
PyPIwcwidth0.2.13indirect
PyPIwebsockets13.1indirect
PyPIxdoctest1.2.0indirect
PyPIzipp3.20.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:desssign@0.0.14 pulls in 15 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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with DanBeranek/desssign. Read them side by side →

100apache/airflowApache Airflow - A platform to programmatically author, schedule, and monitor workflowsExceptional100aws/serverless-application-modelThe AWS Serverless Application Model (AWS SAM) transform is a AWS CloudFormation macro that transforms SAM templates into CloudFormation templates.Exceptional100microsoft/onnxruntimeONNX Runtime: cross-platform, high performance ML inferencing and training acceleratorExceptional100onnx/onnxOpen standard for machine learning interoperabilityExceptional100matplotlib/matplotlibmatplotlib: plotting with PythonExceptional100deepset-ai/haystackOpen-source AI orchestration framework for building context-engineered, production-ready LLM applications. Design modular pipelines and agent workflows with explicit control over retrieval, routing, memory, and generation. Built for scalable agents, RAG, multimodal applications, semantic search, and conversational systems.Exceptional

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 — PyPI.