Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-20 04:05 UTC

JSQLParser / JSqlParser

JSqlParser parses an SQL statement and translate it into a hierarchy of Java classes. The generated hierarchy can be navigated using the Visitor Pattern

JavaApache-2.0★ 5,966 stars⑂ 1,442 forkssince Jun 2011View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryApplicationhow this is determined

JSQLParser/JSqlParser holds a health index of 88 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (83/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (63/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

88
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

88
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 74 is calibrated to 88 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

JSQLParserOrganization
19 followers2 public repossince Jun 2013

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Mavencom.github.jsqlparser:jsqlparser5.4-3736 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

83Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 1 days ago
19.4/36Commit cadence — 28/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 491 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year491
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year28
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 38 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 36 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~168.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count38
latest_release_tagjsqlparser-5.4
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release36
mean_days_between_releases168.2
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?

76Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
60/60Stars — 5,966 stars
25/25Forks — 1,442 forks
12.9/15Watchers — 211 watchers
Inputs used
forks1,442
stars5,966
watchers211
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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_badges6
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesapp.codacy.com, coveralls.io, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

69Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
10.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 53% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 99 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 19 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled99
top_contributor_share0.526
How it's scored
41.9/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
24.4/30PR acceptance — 762/936 decided PRs merged
11/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 17/20 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
13.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 28/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
merged_prs762
open_issues6
closed_issues1,719
prs_merged_7d32
prs_decided_7d36
prs_merged_30d56
prs_decided_30d60
issue_closed_ratio0.997
closed_unmerged_prs174
first_time_authors_30d4
first_time_prs_merged_30d17
first_time_prs_decided_30d20
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
9.4/25Owner reach — 19 followers of JSQLParser
15.5/25Track record — 2 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers19
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginJSQLParser
public_repos2
account_age_days4,882

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on maven
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 36 days ago
20/20Version history — 37 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagescom.github.jsqlparser:jsqlparser
ecosystemsmaven
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish36

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

70Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 26 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://github.com/JSQLParser/JSqlParser/wiki
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 13 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicssql, java, parser, ast, postgresql, mysql, sqlserver, jsqlparser, hierarchy, statement, paypal, sql-statement, oracle
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://github.com/JSQLParser/JSqlParser/wiki
docs_sitehttps://github.com/JSQLParser/JSqlParser/wiki
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

72Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
6.8/7.5Binary-Artifacts — binaries present in source code
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 26 out of 28 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
6.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 28/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 19 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
5/5Fuzzing — project is fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
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
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate7.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
16/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: net.sourceforge.pmd:pmd-core 7.17.0 (moderate 6.8)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
34.2/40No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 234 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories1
affected_packages1
assessed_packages39
unassessed_packages11
affected_by_severitymoderate 1
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 39 resolved dependencies against OSV. 11 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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.

63Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://duckdb.org/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 99 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://duckdb.org/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.99
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — build.gradle, pom.xml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Java (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 5 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.05
toolchain_manifestsbuild.gradle, pom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Java (statically typed)
54.7/55Manageable file sizes — 7/1,152 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJava
largest_source_bytes314,688
source_files_sampled1,152
oversized_source_files7

Key facts

5,966GitHub stars
99contributors
491commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
38releases
1bus factor
6open issues
Maven, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 1,442 ⇿
0Stars
1,442Forks
23Releases

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.

Only the most recent history is shown — this repository exceeds the collection window, so the earliest history is not captured.

05001,0001,5001,442102018-012022-062026-10
Major 0Minor 0Patch 0

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.3 / 10
7.3aggregate

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 · 2026-10-20 04:05 UTC

9Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
9CI-Tests26 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
9Code-ReviewFound 28/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
10Contributorsproject has 19 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate 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
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
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Mavenorg.junit:junit-bom${junit.version}pom.xml
Mavennet.sourceforge.pmd:pmd-core${pmd.version}pom.xml
Mavennet.sourceforge.pmd:pmd-java${pmd.version}pom.xml
Mavencom.manticore-projects.jsqlformatter:javacc-java${javacc.version}pom.xml
Mavencom.manticore-projects.jsqlformatter:javacc-core${javacc.version}pom.xml
Mavencom.puppycrawl.tools:checkstyle${checkstyle.version}pom.xml
All dependencies 50

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 6 direct and 44 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavencom.manticore-projects.jsqlformatter:javacc-core—direct
Mavencom.manticore-projects.jsqlformatter:javacc-java—direct
Mavencom.puppycrawl.tools:checkstyle10.23.1direct
Mavennet.sourceforge.pmd:pmd-core7.17.0direct
Mavennet.sourceforge.pmd:pmd-java7.17.0direct
Mavenorg.junit:junit-bom5.14.4direct
Mavencom.diffplug.spotless:spotless-maven-plugin3.8.0indirect
Mavencom.github.spotbugs:spotbugs-maven-plugin4.9.3.0indirect
Mavencom.h2database:h22.3.232indirect
Mavencommons-io:commons-io2.18.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.commons:commons-lang33.18.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.felix:maven-bundle-plugin5.1.8indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-checkstyle-plugin3.6.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-clean-plugin3.5.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin3.15.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-deploy-plugin3.1.4indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-enforcer-plugin3.6.3indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-gpg-plugin3.2.8indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-install-plugin3.1.4indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-javadoc-plugin3.12.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-jxr-plugin3.6.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-pmd-plugin3.28.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-project-info-reports-plugin3.9.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-release-plugin3.3.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-resources-plugin3.5.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-site-plugin3.22.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-source-plugin3.4.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin3.5.6indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-report-plugin3.5.6indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-toolchains-plugin3.3.0indirect
Mavenorg.assertj:assertj-core3.27.7indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.mojo:build-helper-maven-plugin3.6.0indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.mojo:exec-maven-plugin3.5.0indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.mojo:license-maven-plugin2.0.0indirect
Mavenorg.hamcrest:hamcrest3.0indirect
Mavenorg.jacoco:jacoco-maven-plugin0.8.15indirect
Mavenorg.javacc.plugin:javacc-maven-plugin3.8.0indirect
Mavenorg.junit.jupiter:junit-jupiter—indirect
Mavenorg.mockito:mockito-core5.23.0indirect
Mavenorg.mockito:mockito-junit-jupiter5.23.0indirect
Mavenorg.openjdk.jmh:jmh-core1.37indirect
Mavenorg.sonatype.central:central-publishing-maven-plugin0.10.0indirect
PyPImanticore-sphinx-theme—indirect
PyPImyst-parser—indirect
PyPIpygments—indirect
PyPIsphinx—indirect
PyPIsphinx-inline-tabs—indirect
PyPIsphinx-issues—indirect
PyPIsphinx-javadoc-xml—indirect
PyPIsphinx-substitution-extensions—indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 39 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct. 11 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
net.sourceforge.pmd:pmd-core7.17.0directmoderate17.22.0

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 — Maven.