Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-03 17:49 UTC

FasterXML / jackson-modules-java8

Set of support modules for Java 8 datatypes (Optionals, date/time) and features (parameter names)

JavaApache-2.0★ 423 stars⑂ 124 forkssince Nov 2016View on GitHub ↗

FasterXML/jackson-modules-java8 holds a health index of 69 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (75/100) and lowest on Vitality (40/100). It was last updated 18 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

69
overall / 100
Good

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.

69
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 62 is calibrated to 69 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

FasterXML, LLCOrganization
425 followers68 public repossince Sep 2010

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.datatype:jackson-datatype-jsr3102.22.2-17218 days ago
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.datatype:jackson-datatype-jdk82.22.2-15418 days ago
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.module:jackson-module-parameter-names2.22.2-15718 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

40Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recencylast push 18 days ago
9/36Commit cadence13/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume141 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year141
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push18
active_weeks_last_year13
How it's scored
0/27Ships releasesno releases published
0/36Release recencyno releases
0/27Release cadenceno releases
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count0
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?

59Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
42.6/60Stars423 stars
17.4/25Forks124 forks
6.2/15Watchers14 watchers
Inputs used
forks124
stars423
watchers14
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges1
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

67Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.8/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 92% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth43 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled43
top_contributor_share0.918
How it's scored
39.2/42Issue resolution93% of issues closed
22.7/30PR acceptance109/144 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 2/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs109
open_issues16
closed_issues223
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio0.933
closed_unmerged_prs35
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
18.9/25Owner reach425 followers of FasterXML
25/25Track record68 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers425
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginFasterXML
public_repos68
account_age_days5,846

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable3 package(s) on maven
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 18 days ago
20/20Version history172 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagescom.fasterxml.jackson.datatype:jackson-datatype-jsr310, com.fasterxml.jackson.datatype:jackson-datatype-jdk8, com.fasterxml.jackson.module:jackson-module-parameter-names
ecosystemsmaven
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish18

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

75Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests2 out of 2 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

Documentation

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsjackson, hacktoberfest, java-date
has_wikiyes
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?

75Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
6.8/7.5Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests2 out of 2 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 2/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
5/5Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
5/5Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate6.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

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_packages3
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 maven:com.fasterxml.jackson.datatype:jackson-datatype-jsr310@2.22.2 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 3 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.

49Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
1.1/40Legible commit history2 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.02
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapdatatypes/pom.xml, datetime/pom.xml, parameter-names/pom.xml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingJava (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
10/10Demonstrated agent practice6 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.06
toolchain_manifestsdatatypes/pom.xml, datetime/pom.xml, parameter-names/pom.xml, pom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeJava (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/247 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJava
largest_source_bytes45,151
source_files_sampled247
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

423GitHub stars
43contributors
141commits, last 12 months
18days since last push
0releases
1bus factor
16open issues
Mavenpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 124 ⇿
0Stars
124Forks

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.

02040608010012011552016-112021-092026-08

Each point covers 9 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.8 / 10
6.8aggregate

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 · 2026-09-03 17:48 UTC

9Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests2 out of 2 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 2/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-annotationsdatetime/pom.xml
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-corepom.xml
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databindpom.xml
All dependencies 14

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 11 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-annotationsdirect
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-coredirect
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databinddirect
Mavencom.google.code.maven-replacer-plugin:replacerindirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-pluginindirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-enforcer-pluginindirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-pluginindirect
Mavenorg.assertj:assertj-coreindirect
Mavenorg.cyclonedx:cyclonedx-maven-pluginindirect
Mavenorg.gradlex:gradle-module-metadata-maven-pluginindirect
Mavenorg.junit.jupiter:junit-jupiterindirect
Mavenorg.junit.jupiter:junit-jupiter-apiindirect
Mavenorg.mockito:mockito-core4.5.0indirect
Mavenorg.moditect:moditect-maven-pluginindirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing maven:com.fasterxml.jackson.datatype:jackson-datatype-jsr310@2.22.2 pulls in 3 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 statisticsMaven.