Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-15 11:36 UTC

JellyBrick / node-dbus-next

🚌 The next great dbus library for node

TypeScriptCustom license★ 3 stars⑂ 3 forkssince Jan 2025forkView on GitHub ↗

JellyBrick/node-dbus-next holds a health index of 42 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (65/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (28/100). It was last updated 40 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

42
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.

42
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).

Ownership

JellyBrickPersonal account
317 followers186 public repossince Jan 2016@organization

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 publishTags
npm@jellybrick/dbus-next0.11.3110,355540 days agodbusdcopd-busrpcgnomekde

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

49Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 40 days ago
1.4/36Commit cadence2/52 weeks with commits
8.6/18Commit volume8 commits in the last year
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained8 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
commits_last_year8
human_commit_share0.99
days_since_last_push40
active_weeks_last_year2
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases16 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recencylatest release 40 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~297.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count16
latest_release_tagv0.11.3
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release40
mean_days_between_releases297.8
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?

30At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
4.9/60Stars3 stars
2.5/25Forks3 forks
0/15Watchers1 watchers
Inputs used
forks3
stars3
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
0/22.5README
16.9/22.5Licenselicense file present, not a recognized license
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeno
has_licenseno
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
67.2/80Monthly downloads110,355 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@jellybrick/dbus-next
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads110,355
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?

65Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
8.1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 64% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth52 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled52
top_contributor_share0.639
How it's scored
31.5/42Issue resolution75% of issues closed
25.7/30PR acceptance6/7 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 1/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs6
open_issues1
closed_issues3
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.75
closed_unmerged_prs1
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
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
18/25Owner reach317 followers of JellyBrick
25/25Track record186 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers317
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginJellyBrick
public_repos186
account_age_days3,905
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 40 days ago
20/20Version history5 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@jellybrick/dbus-next
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish40

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

28At Risk · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
0/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://www.npmjs.com/package/@jellybrick/dbus-next
0/10Repository description
10/10Topics8 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsdbus, dbus-api, dbus-service, javascript, linux, nodejs, typescript, dbus-node
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://www.npmjs.com/package/@jellybrick/dbus-next
docs_sitehttps://www.npmjs.com/package/@jellybrick/dbus-next
has_readmeno
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionno

Security

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

41Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 1/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5Licenselicense file detected
4.5/7.5Maintained8 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
1.5/7.5Vulnerabilities8 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate2.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. 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_packages8
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 npm:@jellybrick/dbus-next@0.11.3 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 8 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.

59Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
20.5/40Legible commit history38 of 99 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.384
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingtsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance1 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespnpm-lock.yaml
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.01
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeTypeScript (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/65 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes21,655
source_files_sampled65
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

3GitHub stars
52contributors
8commits, last 12 months
40days since last push
16releases
1bus factor
1open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Community profile unavailable
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 3 ⇿
0Stars
3Forks

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.

12233312025-022025-052025-08
OpenSSF Scorecard 2.6 / 10
2.6aggregate

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 · 2026-09-15 11:35 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 1/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
6Maintained8 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
2Vulnerabilities8 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmfast-xml-builder^1.3.0package.json
npmfast-xml-parser^5.10.1package.json
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

Dependency advisories 0

Installing npm:@jellybrick/dbus-next@0.11.3 pulls in 8 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 statisticsnpm.