Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-12 20:57 UTC

HappyHackingSpace / dit

HTML page, form and field type classifier using ML (LogReg + CRF)

GoMIT★ 17 stars⑂ 4 forkssince Feb 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

HappyHackingSpace/dit holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (79/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (52/100). It was last updated 8 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

78
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.

78
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 67 is calibrated to 78 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Happy Hacking SpaceOrganization · verified domain
103 followers65 public repossince Oct 2022

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Gogithub.com/happyhackingspace/ditv0.0.34-348 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

79Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 8 days ago
16.6/36Commit cadence — 24/52 weeks with commits
17.6/18Commit volume — 90 commits in the last year
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 10 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
commits_last_year90
human_commit_share0.656
days_since_last_push8
active_weeks_last_year24
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 34 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 8 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~11.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count34
latest_release_tagv0.0.34
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release8
mean_days_between_releases11.7

Community & Adoption

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

52Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
19.5/60Stars — 17 stars
4/25Forks — 4 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks4
stars17
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonbelow_threshold

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_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

65Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
8.4/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 63% of commits
8.1/13.5Contributor breadth — 6 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled6
top_contributor_share0.627
How it's scored
10.5/42Issue resolution — 25% of issues closed
26.8/30PR acceptance — 42/47 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
9/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 2/3 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
merged_prs42
open_issues12
closed_issues4
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.25
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
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
14.5/25Owner reach — 103 followers of HappyHackingSpace
20.9/25Track record — 65 public repos, account ~3 yr old
Inputs used
followers103
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginHappyHackingSpace
public_repos65
account_age_days1,441

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 8 days ago
20/20Version history — 34 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/happyhackingspace/dit
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish8

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

69Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .golangci.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 24 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 10 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsclassification, cli, crf, forms, go, html, logistic-regression, machine-learning, nlp, web-scraping
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?

66Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 24 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4.5/7.5Code-Review — Found 2/3 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 4 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
6/7.5Maintained — 10 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file 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
5.2/7.5Vulnerabilities — 3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate5.8

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories3
affected_packages1
assessed_packages31
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityunknown 1
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 31 resolved dependencies against OSV. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. 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.

65Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
32.5/40Legible commit history — 36 of 59 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.61
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — go.mod (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .golangci.yml
11/11Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 90
8/8Automated maintenance — 31 of the last 90 commits are automated dependency updates
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0.344
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/52 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes20,869
source_files_sampled52
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

17GitHub stars
6contributors
90commits, last 12 months
8days since last push
34releases
1bus factor
12open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Star history carried forward from 2026-07-14: GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository admins, so it can no longer be collected. The repository has 17 stars today.

More detail

Star and fork history 17 ★ / 4 ⇿
17Stars
4Forks
29Releases

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.

Star history is shown as collected on 2026-07-14. GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository administrators in July 2026, so this series can no longer be extended; the current star total above remains live.

04812162017432026-022026-042026-07
Major 0Minor 0Patch 29
OpenSSF Scorecard 5.8 / 10
5.8aggregate

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 · 2026-09-12 20:56 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
9CI-Tests24 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6Code-ReviewFound 2/3 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
10Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
8Maintained10 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
1Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7Vulnerabilities3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 5
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/PuerkitoBio/goqueryv1.13.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/chromedp/chromedpv0.16.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/creativeprojects/go-selfupdatev1.6.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.58.0go.mod
All dependencies 31

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 26 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/chromedp/chromedpv0.16.0direct
Gogithub.com/creativeprojects/go-selfupdatev1.6.0direct
Gogithub.com/puerkitobio/goqueryv1.13.0direct
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2direct
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.58.0direct
Gocode.gitea.io/sdk/giteav0.23.2indirect
Gogithub.com/42wim/httpsigv1.2.4indirect
Gogithub.com/andybalholm/cascadiav1.3.4indirect
Gogithub.com/chromedp/cdprotov0.0.0-20260714215040-dc233986426findirect
Gogithub.com/chromedp/sysutilv1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/davidmz/go-pageantv1.0.2indirect
Gogithub.com/go-fed/httpsigv1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/go-json-experiment/jsonv0.0.0-20260623181947-01eb4420fa68indirect
Gogithub.com/gobwas/httpheadv0.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/gobwas/poolv0.2.1indirect
Gogithub.com/gobwas/wsv1.4.0indirect
Gogithub.com/google/go-github/v86v86.0.0indirect
Gogithub.com/google/go-querystringv1.2.0indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/go-cleanhttpv0.5.2indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/go-retryablehttpv0.7.8indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/go-versionv1.9.0indirect
Gogithub.com/inconshreveable/mousetrapv1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/masterminds/semver/v3v3.5.0indirect
Gogithub.com/spf13/pflagv1.0.9indirect
Gogithub.com/ulikunitz/xzv0.5.15indirect
Gogitlab.com/gitlab-org/api/client-gov1.46.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/cryptov0.55.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/oauth2v0.36.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.47.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/timev0.15.0indirect
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 31 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
golang.org/x/cryptov0.55.0indirectunknown30.56.0

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 — Go.