Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 13:12 UTC

JensvandeWiel / ArkAscendedServerManager

A server manager for ARK: Ascended

KotlinMIT★ 74 stars⑂ 13 forkssince Oct 2023View on GitHub ↗

JensvandeWiel/ArkAscendedServerManager holds a health index of 69 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (81/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (47/100). It was last updated 2 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

Jens van de WielPersonal account
28 followers28 public repossince Jun 2021Wynq, Divtag

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 publish
crates.iooverseer0.1.031671 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

81Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 2 days ago
11.1/36Commit cadence16/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume179 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year179
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year16
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases12 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 3 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~8.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count12
latest_release_tagv0.6.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release3
mean_days_between_releases8.9

Community & Adoption

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

47Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
30.2/60Stars74 stars
9/25Forks13 forks
4.3/15Watchers7 watchers
Inputs used
forks13
stars74
watchers7
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

52Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
5.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 75% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth3 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.749
How it's scored
41.5/42Issue resolution99% of issues closed
27.6/30PR acceptance113/123 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs113
open_issues1
closed_issues86
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.989
closed_unmerged_prs10
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
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
10.5/25Owner reach28 followers of JensvandeWiel
20.9/25Track record28 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers28
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginJensvandeWiel
public_repos28
account_age_days1,870
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on crates
14/35Publish recencylatest publish 671 days ago
4/20Version history1 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesoverseer
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish671

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

77Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests17 out of 17 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

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://jensvandewiel.github.io/ArkAscendedServerManager/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics13 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsark, ark-survival-ascended, asa, gameserver, golang, hosting, manager, open-source, server, server-management, servers, wails, asa-server-manager
has_wikino
homepagehttps://jensvandewiel.github.io/ArkAscendedServerManager/
docs_sitehttps://jensvandewiel.github.io/ArkAscendedServerManager/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

49Weak · 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-Tests17 out of 17 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 0/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
5/5SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6.8/7.5Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate4.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

69Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions.github/copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files.github/copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes614
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingKotlin (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeKotlin (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/97 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageKotlin
largest_source_bytes39,741
source_files_sampled97
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

74GitHub stars
3contributors
179commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
12releases
1bus factor
1open issues
crates.io, Mavenpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Could not fetch crates package 'core-native' from its registry

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.9 / 10
4.9aggregate

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 · 2026-07-17 13:12 UTC

9Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests17 out of 17 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 0/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.ioanyhow1.0.102core-native/Cargo.toml
crates.ioctrlc3overseer/Cargo.toml
All dependencies 82

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 79 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioanyhowdirect
crates.ioanyhow1.0.102direct
crates.ioctrlc3.5.2direct
crates.iobitflags1.3.2indirect
crates.iobitflags2.11.0indirect
crates.ioblock20.6.2indirect
crates.iocfg-if1.0.4indirect
crates.iocfg_aliases0.1.1indirect
crates.iocfg_aliases0.2.1indirect
crates.iodispatch20.3.1indirect
crates.iodowncast-rs1.2.1indirect
crates.iofiledescriptor0.8.3indirect
crates.iolazy_static1.5.0indirect
crates.iolibc0.2.184indirect
crates.iolog0.4.29indirect
crates.ionix0.28.0indirect
crates.ionix0.31.2indirect
crates.ioobjc20.6.4indirect
crates.ioobjc2-encode4.1.0indirect
crates.ioportable-pty0.9.0indirect
crates.ioproc-macro21.0.106indirect
crates.ioquote1.0.45indirect
crates.ioserde1.0.228indirect
crates.ioserde_core1.0.228indirect
crates.ioserde_derive1.0.228indirect
crates.ioserial20.2.37indirect
crates.ioshared_library0.1.9indirect
crates.ioshell-words1.1.1indirect
crates.iosyn2.0.117indirect
crates.iothiserror1.0.69indirect
crates.iothiserror-impl1.0.69indirect
crates.iotoml0.5.11indirect
crates.iounicode-ident1.0.24indirect
crates.iowinapi0.3.9indirect
crates.iowinapi-i686-pc-windows-gnu0.4.0indirect
crates.iowinapi-x86_64-pc-windows-gnu0.4.0indirect
crates.iowindows-link0.2.1indirect
crates.iowindows-sys0.61.2indirect
crates.iowinreg0.10.1indirect
crates.iowinresindirect
crates.iowinres0.1.12indirect
Gogithub.com/adrg/xdg0.4.0indirect
Gogithub.com/bep/debounce1.2.1indirect
Gogithub.com/fsnotify/fsnotify1.4.9indirect
Gogithub.com/go-ini/ini1.67.0indirect
Gogithub.com/go-ole/go-ole1.3.0indirect
Gogithub.com/godbus/dbus/v55.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/google/uuid1.3.1indirect
Gogithub.com/gorcon/rcon1.3.4indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/go-version1.6.0indirect
Gogithub.com/inconshreveable/go-update0.0.0-20160112193335-8152e7eb6ccfindirect
Gogithub.com/jchv/go-winloader0.0.0-20210711035445-715c2860da7eindirect
Gogithub.com/jensvandewiel/ark-ini1.2.0indirect
Gogithub.com/jensvandewiel/gosteamcmd0.1.2indirect
Gogithub.com/labstack/echo/v44.11.2indirect
Gogithub.com/labstack/gommon0.4.0indirect
Gogithub.com/leaanthony/go-ansi-parser1.6.1indirect
Gogithub.com/leaanthony/gosod1.0.3indirect
Gogithub.com/leaanthony/slicer1.6.0indirect
Gogithub.com/leaanthony/u1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-colorable0.1.13indirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-isatty0.0.20indirect
Gogithub.com/pkg/browser0.0.0-20210911075715-681adbf594b8indirect
Gogithub.com/pkg/errors0.9.1indirect
Gogithub.com/rivo/uniseg0.4.4indirect
Gogithub.com/samber/lo1.38.1indirect
Gogithub.com/sethvargo/go-password0.2.0indirect
Gogithub.com/sqweek/dialog0.0.0-20220809060634-e981b270ebbfindirect
Gogithub.com/stackexchange/wmi1.2.1indirect
Gogithub.com/thetitanrain/w320.0.0-20180517000239-4f5cfb03fabfindirect
Gogithub.com/tkrajina/go-reflector0.5.6indirect
Gogithub.com/userexistserror/conpty0.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/valyala/bytebufferpool1.0.0indirect
Gogithub.com/valyala/fasttemplate1.2.2indirect
Gogithub.com/wailsapp/go-webview21.0.10indirect
Gogithub.com/wailsapp/mimetype1.4.1indirect
Gogithub.com/wailsapp/wails/v22.7.1indirect
Gogolang.org/x/crypto0.17.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/exp0.0.0-20231006140011-7918f672742dindirect
Gogolang.org/x/net0.17.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sys0.15.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/text0.14.0indirect
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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticscrates.io.