Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-12 19:03 UTC

F4-Group / fack

F4 stack

Stylus · JavaScriptNo license detected★ 5 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Dec 2013View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryNetwork serviceCommand-line toolhow this is determined

F4-Group/fack holds a health index of 44 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (58/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (28/100). It was last updated 38 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

44
overall / 100
Weak

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.

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

Ownership

F4Organization
6 followers102 public repossince Dec 2013

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npmfack4.11.13,46022038 days ago—
npmbootstrap-stylus⚠ Please see bootstrap-styl https://www.npmjs.com/package/bootstrap-stylpoints to another repo — not scored0.2.220044218 days agoserverstylus

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

53Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 38 days ago
3.5/36Commit cadence — 5/52 weeks with commits
12.2/18Commit volume — 22 commits in the last year
7/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 9 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
commits_last_year22
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push38
active_weeks_last_year5
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 100 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recency — latest release 38 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~122.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag4.11.1
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release38
mean_days_between_releases122.6
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?

28At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
9.8/60Stars — 5 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
2.7/15Watchers — 4 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars5
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
0/22.5License — no license file detected
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseno
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
47.2/80Monthly downloads — 3,460 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesfack
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads3,460
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?

58Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 46% of commits
12.2/13.5Contributor breadth — 9 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled9
top_contributor_share0.465
How it's scored
21/42Issue resolution — 50% of issues closed
0/30PR acceptance — 0/4 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs0
open_issues1
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.5
closed_unmerged_prs4
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
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
6.1/25Owner reach — 6 followers of F4-Group
25/25Track record — 102 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers6
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginF4-Group
public_repos102
account_age_days4,688

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 38 days ago
20/20Version history — 220 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesfack
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish38

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

54Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .eslintrc.js
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 2 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsjavascript, nodejs
has_wikiyes
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?

31At Risk · 16% of overall
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 — no data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
0/2.5License — license file not detected
5.2/7.5Maintained — 9 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 7
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate3.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
17.9/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: express 4.16.4 (moderate 6.1)
1.3/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — 20 affected: minimist 0.0.5 (critical 9.8), body-parser 1.18.3 (high 7.5), braces 1.8.5 (high 7.5), +17 more
9.5/40No advisories left outstanding — 20 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 2,382 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories33
affected_packages21
assessed_packages667
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitycritical 1, high 9, moderate 10, low 1
direct_affected_packages1
Matched the npm:fack@4.11.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 667 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.

41Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
37.9/40Legible commit history — 71 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.71
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .eslintrc.js
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
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 — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Stylus without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/50 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageStylus
largest_source_bytes21,202
source_files_sampled50
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

5GitHub stars
9contributors
22commits, last 12 months
38days since last push
100releases
2bus factor
1open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • npm package 'bootstrap-stylus' points at a different repository (https://github.com/shomeya/bootstrap-stylus); excluded from ecosystem scoring

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 · 2026-10-12 19:03 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
0Licenselicense file not detected
7Maintained9 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 7
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 33
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@babel/core^7.3.4package.json
npm@babel/preset-env^7.3.4package.json
npm@browserify/uglifyify^6.0.0package.json
npmapp-root-path^3.0.0package.json
npmasync0.2.5package.json
npmbabelify^10.0.0package.json
npmbody-parser^1.18.3package.json
npmbrowserify~16.2.2package.json
npmbunyan^1.8.15package.json
npmbunyan-gelfgit+https://github.com/F4-Group/bunyan-gelf#0.3.2package.json
npmbunyan-prettystream~0.1.3package.json
npmclean-css^4.2.1package.json
npmcli-color~0.2.3package.json
npmconcat-stream~1.5.0package.json
npmdnscache~1.0.1package.json
npmexpress~4.16.3package.json
npmfactor-bundle~2.5.0package.json
npmfile~0.2.2package.json
npmglob^7.1.2package.json
npmhumanize~0.0.9package.json
npmi18nextgit+https://github.com/F4-Group/i18next-node#1.7.4-2package.json
npmlodash^4.17.10package.json
npmmime^2.3.1package.json
npmmkdirp^1.0.4package.json
npmmold-source-map~0.4.0package.json
npmnibgit+https://github.com/F4-Group/nib#1.1.2+f4package.json
npmnode-etcd^7.0.0package.json
npmoptimist0.3.xpackage.json
npmpugify^2.2.0package.json
npmstatsd-client~0.0.17package.json
npmterser^5.19.2package.json
npmthrough2~0.6.3package.json
npmwatchify~3.6.1package.json
All dependencies 52

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 31 direct and 21 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@babel/core^7.3.4direct
npm@babel/preset-env^7.3.4direct
npm@browserify/uglifyify^6.0.0direct
npmapp-root-path^3.0.0direct
npmasync0.2.5direct
npmbabelify^10.0.0direct
npmbody-parser^1.18.3direct
npmbrowserify~16.2.2direct
npmbunyan^1.8.15direct
npmbunyan-prettystream~0.1.3direct
npmclean-css^4.2.1direct
npmcli-color~0.2.3direct
npmconcat-stream~1.5.0direct
npmdnscache~1.0.1direct
npmexpress~4.16.3direct
npmfactor-bundle~2.5.0direct
npmfile~0.2.2direct
npmglob^7.1.2direct
npmhumanize~0.0.9direct
npmlodash^4.17.10direct
npmmime^2.3.1direct
npmmkdirp^1.0.4direct
npmmold-source-map~0.4.0direct
npmnib~1.0.2direct
npmnode-etcd^7.0.0direct
npmoptimist0.3.xdirect
npmpugify^2.2.0direct
npmstatsd-client~0.0.17direct
npmterser^5.19.2direct
npmthrough2~0.6.3direct
npmwatchify~3.6.1direct
npmaxios^0.20.0indirect
npmbabel-plugin-transform-exponentiation-operator^6.24.1indirect
npmchai^4.2.0indirect
npmchai-better-shallow-deep-equal^1.1.1indirect
npmcross-spawn^7.0.3indirect
npmeslint^7.9.0indirect
npmeslint-plugin-mocha^8.0.0indirect
npmgrunt~0.4.2indirect
npmgrunt-contrib-clean~0.5.0indirect
npmgrunt-contrib-cssmin~0.7.0indirect
npmgrunt-contrib-stylus~0.13.2indirect
npmgrunt-contrib-uglify~0.3.2indirect
npmgrunt-contrib-watch~0.5.3indirect
npmjquery~2.1.1indirect
npmmocha^8.1.3indirect
npmportscanner^2.2.0indirect
npmpug^3.0.2indirect
npmsocket.io~1.4.8indirect
npmsocket.io-client~1.4.8indirect
npmstylus^0.55.0indirect
npmstylus~0.44.0indirect
Dependency advisories 21

Installing npm:fack@4.11.1 pulls in 667 packages, direct and transitive: 21 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
minimist0.0.5indirectcritical21.2.6
body-parser1.18.3indirecthigh22.3.0
braces1.8.5indirecthigh23.0.3
braces2.3.2indirecthigh23.0.3
decode-uri-component0.2.2indirecthigh10.5.0
elliptic6.6.1indirecthigh1—
form-data2.3.3indirecthigh24.0.6
path-to-regexp0.1.7indirecthigh38.0.0
qs6.5.2indirecthigh36.16.0
uuid3.4.0indirecthigh113.0.1
express4.16.4directmoderate25.0.0-beta.3
micromatch2.3.11indirectmoderate14.0.8
micromatch3.1.10indirectmoderate14.0.8
pug2.0.4indirectmoderate23.0.3
pug-code-gen2.0.3indirectmoderate13.0.3
qs6.5.5indirectmoderate26.16.0
request2.88.2indirectmoderate13.0.0
send0.16.2indirectmoderate10.19.0
serve-static1.13.2indirectmoderate12.1.0
tough-cookie2.5.0indirectmoderate14.1.3
cookie0.3.1indirectlow10.7.0

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 — npm.