Public record
Software health reportschema 0.15.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-20 14:02 UTC

Envek / after_commit_everywhere

Use ActiveRecord transactional callbacks outside of models, literally everywhere in your application.

RubyMIT★ 786 stars⑂ 23 forkssince Mar 2018View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined

Envek/after_commit_everywhere holds a health index of 32 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (67/100) and lowest on Vitality (19/100). It was last updated 528 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

32
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.

32
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 45 is calibrated to 42 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02). High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 75% multiplier to weighted overall health and gives it an At Risk ceiling of 34.

Ownership

Andrey NovikovPersonal account
247 followers187 public repossince May 2010@evilmartians

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
RubyGemsafter_commit_everywhere1.6.0-16528 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

19Critical · 21% of overall

Development activity

1Critical
How it's scored
0/36Push recency — last push 528 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_share—
days_since_last_push528
active_weeks_last_year0

Release discipline

47Weak
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 13 releases published
7.2/36Release recency — latest release 528 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~161.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count13
latest_release_tagv1.6.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release528
mean_days_between_releases161.2

Community & Adoption

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

67Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

63Moderate
How it's scored
47/60Stars — 786 stars
11.2/25Forks — 23 forks
4.7/15Watchers — 8 watchers
Inputs used
forks23
stars786
watchers8
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
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

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

98Exceptional
How it's scored
78.8/80Total downloads — 38,477,934 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesafter_commit_everywhere
dependents—
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads38,477,934
monthly_downloads—
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?

61Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

39Weak
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6.4/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 72% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 16 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled16
top_contributor_share0.716

Issue & PR responsiveness

70Good
How it's scored
30/42Issue resolution — 71% of issues closed
26.1/30PR acceptance — 20/23 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 10/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs20
open_issues4
closed_issues10
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.714
closed_unmerged_prs3
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.

Ownership & stewardship

65Good
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
17.2/25Owner reach — 247 followers of Envek
25/25Track record — 187 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers247
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginEnvek
public_repos187
account_age_days5,921
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 rubygems
14/35Publish recency — latest publish 528 days ago
20/20Version history — 16 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesafter_commit_everywhere
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish528

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

54Moderate · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

64Moderate
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

40Weak
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

24At Risk · 16% of overall

Security posture

24At 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 12 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
2.2/7.5Code-Review — Found 10/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
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 — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 54 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate3.2
high_risk_jurisdiction_cap34
high_risk_jurisdiction_multiplier75
security_posture_after_multiplier24
security_posture_before_jurisdiction32
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized. High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 75% multiplier and gives Security posture an At risk ceiling of 34.

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.

35Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

52Moderate
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
0/8Automated maintenance — no data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Ruby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/6 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes22,245
source_files_sampled6
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

786GitHub stars
16contributors
0commits, last 12 months
528days since last push
13releases
1bus factor
4open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.2 / 10
3.2aggregate

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 · 2026-07-20 14:02 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 10/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
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
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities54 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 8
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsisolator~> 1.1Gemfile
RubyGemsrake~> 13.0Gemfile
RubyGemsrspec~> 3.0Gemfile
RubyGemsrspec-rails—Gemfile
RubyGemsrubocop~> 0.81.0Gemfile
RubyGemssqlite3>= 1.3.6Gemfile
RubyGemsyard—Gemfile
RubyGemsdebug—Gemfile
All dependencies 73

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 8 direct and 65 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsdebug1.10.0direct
RubyGemsisolator1.1.0direct
RubyGemsrake13.2.1direct
RubyGemsrspec3.13.0direct
RubyGemsrspec-rails7.1.1direct
RubyGemsrubocop0.81.0direct
RubyGemssqlite32.5.0direct
RubyGemsyard0.9.37direct
RubyGemsactionpack8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsactionview8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsactivemodel8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsactiverecord—indirect
RubyGemsactiverecord8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsactivesupport—indirect
RubyGemsactivesupport8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsanyway_config2.6.4indirect
RubyGemsappraisal—indirect
RubyGemsappraisal2.5.0indirect
RubyGemsast2.4.2indirect
RubyGemsbase640.2.0indirect
RubyGemsbenchmark0.4.0indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal3.1.9indirect
RubyGemsbuilder3.3.0indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.5indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool2.5.0indirect
RubyGemscrass1.0.6indirect
RubyGemsdate3.4.1indirect
RubyGemsdiff-lcs1.5.1indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.1indirect
RubyGemsdry-initializer3.2.0indirect
RubyGemserubi1.13.1indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.14.7indirect
RubyGemsio-console0.8.0indirect
RubyGemsirb1.15.1indirect
RubyGemsjaro_winkler1.5.6indirect
RubyGemslogger1.6.5indirect
RubyGemsloofah2.24.0indirect
RubyGemsmini_portile22.8.8indirect
RubyGemsminitest5.25.4indirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.18.2indirect
RubyGemsparallel1.26.3indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.7.1indirect
RubyGemspp0.6.2indirect
RubyGemsprettyprint0.2.0indirect
RubyGemspsych5.2.3indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrack3.1.9indirect
RubyGemsrack-session2.1.0indirect
RubyGemsrack-test2.2.0indirect
RubyGemsrackup2.2.1indirect
RubyGemsrails-dom-testing2.2.0indirect
RubyGemsrails-html-sanitizer1.6.2indirect
RubyGemsrailties8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrdoc6.12.0indirect
RubyGemsreline0.6.0indirect
RubyGemsrexml3.4.0indirect
RubyGemsrspec-core3.13.3indirect
RubyGemsrspec-expectations3.13.3indirect
RubyGemsrspec-mocks3.13.2indirect
RubyGemsrspec-support3.13.2indirect
RubyGemsruby-next-core1.1.1indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemssecurerandom0.4.1indirect
RubyGemssniffer0.5.0indirect
RubyGemsstringio3.1.2indirect
RubyGemsthor1.3.2indirect
RubyGemstimeout0.4.3indirect
RubyGemstzinfo2.0.6indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width1.8.0indirect
RubyGemsuri1.0.2indirect
RubyGemsuseragent0.16.11indirect
RubyGemszeitwerk2.7.1indirect
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 Envek/after_commit_everywhere. Read them side by side →

100apache/arrowApache Arrow is the universal columnar format and multi-language toolbox for fast data interchange and in-memory analyticsExceptional99grpc/grpcC++ based gRPC (C++, Python, Ruby, Objective-C, PHP, C#)Exceptional99ruby/rubygemsLibrary packaging and distribution for Ruby.Exceptional99stripe/stripe-react-nativeReact Native library for Stripe.Exceptional99open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rubyOpenTelemetry Ruby API & SDK, and related gemsExceptional99newrelic/newrelic-ruby-agentNew Relic RPM Ruby AgentExceptional

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 v0.15.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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