Public record
Software health reportschema 0.12.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 21:19 UTC

Kellerman81 / go_media_downloader

Media Manager similar to Radarr and Sonarr written in go

GoAGPL-3.0★ 13 stars⑂ 3 forkssince Aug 2021View on GitHub ↗
#golang#usenet#newznab#downloader#nzb#movies#series#go#rss#torrent

Kellerman81/go_media_downloader holds a health index of 51 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (71/100) and lowest on Security (33/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

51
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

51
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 51 is calibrated to 51 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Kellerman81Personal account
3 followers6 public repossince May 2020

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

71Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

59Moderate
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 4 days ago
6.9/36Commit cadence — 10/52 weeks with commits
11.9/18Commit volume — 20 commits in the last year
4/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
commits_last_year20
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year10

Release discipline

90Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 36 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 4 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~38 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count36
latest_release_tagv0.3.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release4
mean_days_between_releases38

Community & Adoption

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

34At Risk · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

20At Risk
How it's scored
17.5/60Stars — 13 stars
2.5/25Forks — 3 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks3
stars13
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (AGPL-3.0)
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?

40Weak · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

10Critical
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1

Issue & PR responsiveness

74Good
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
0/30PR acceptance — no decided pull requests or no data
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs0
open_issues0
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): PR acceptance, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

41Weak
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
4.3/25Owner reach — 3 followers of Kellerman81
18.2/25Track record — 6 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers3
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginKellerman81
public_repos6
account_age_days2,259
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

70Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

60Moderate
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
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 10 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsgolang, usenet, newznab, downloader, nzb, movies, series, go, rss, torrent
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?

33At Risk · 16% of overall

Security posture

33At Risk
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — no data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
3/7.5Maintained — 5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not 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
6/7.5Vulnerabilities — 2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate3.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests. 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.

52Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

74Good
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
0/8Automated maintenance — no data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile
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.

Code legibility for models

96Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
50.6/55Manageable file sizes — 24/297 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes1,808,152
source_files_sampled297
oversized_source_files24

Machine-readable interfaces

50Moderate
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — docs/swagger.json, docs/swagger.yaml
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs—
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filesdocs/swagger.json, docs/swagger.yaml
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

13GitHub stars
1contributors
20commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
36releases
1bus factor
0open issues
—package ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.3 / 10
3.3aggregate

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 · 2026-07-17 21:19 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
4Maintained5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTno SAST tool detected
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
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 73

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 73 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/alitto/pond/v2v2.7.1indirect
Gogithub.com/andybalholm/cascadiav1.3.3indirect
Gogithub.com/antchfx/htmlqueryv1.3.6indirect
Gogithub.com/antchfx/xpathv1.3.6indirect
Gogithub.com/bogem/id3v2/v2v2.1.4indirect
Gogithub.com/bytedance/gopkgv0.1.3indirect
Gogithub.com/bytedance/sonicv1.15.0indirect
Gogithub.com/bytedance/sonic/loaderv0.5.0indirect
Gogithub.com/cespare/xxhash/v2v2.3.0indirect
Gogithub.com/cloudwego/base64xv0.1.6indirect
Gogithub.com/davecgh/go-spewv1.1.2-0.20180830191138-d8f796af33ccindirect
Gogithub.com/deanthompson/ginpprofv0.0.0-20260510063128-6416bbab1bfcindirect
Gogithub.com/dgraph-io/ristretto/v2v2.4.0indirect
Gogithub.com/dustin/go-humanizev1.0.1indirect
Gogithub.com/fsnotify/fsnotifyv1.10.1indirect
Gogithub.com/gabriel-vasile/mimetypev1.4.12indirect
Gogithub.com/gin-contrib/ssev1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/gin-gonic/ginv1.12.0indirect
Gogithub.com/go-playground/localesv0.14.1indirect
Gogithub.com/go-playground/universal-translatorv0.18.1indirect
Gogithub.com/go-playground/validator/v10v10.30.1indirect
Gogithub.com/goccy/go-jsonv0.10.6indirect
Gogithub.com/goccy/go-yamlv1.19.2indirect
Gogithub.com/golang-migrate/migrate/v44.18.3indirect
Gogithub.com/golang-migrate/migrate/v4v4.19.1indirect
Gogithub.com/golang/groupcachev0.0.0-20210331224755-41bb18bfe9daindirect
Gogithub.com/google/uuidv1.6.0indirect
Gogithub.com/h2non/filetype1.1.3indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/errwrap1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/go-multierror1.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/icza/bitiov1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/jmoiron/sqlxv1.4.0indirect
Gogithub.com/json-iterator/gov1.1.12indirect
Gogithub.com/klauspost/cpuid/v2v2.3.0indirect
Gogithub.com/leodido/go-urnv1.4.0indirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-colorablev0.1.14indirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-isattyv0.0.20indirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-sqlite31.14.32indirect
Gogithub.com/mewkiz/flacv1.0.13indirect
Gogithub.com/modern-go/concurrentv0.0.0-20180306012644-bacd9c7ef1ddindirect
Gogithub.com/modern-go/reflect2v1.0.2indirect
Gogithub.com/mozillazg/go-unidecode0.2.0indirect
Gogithub.com/mozillazg/go-unidecodev0.2.0indirect
Gogithub.com/ncruces/go-strftimev1.0.0indirect
Gogithub.com/pelletier/go-toml/v22.2.4indirect
Gogithub.com/pelletier/go-toml/v2v2.3.1indirect
Gogithub.com/pmezard/go-difflibv1.0.1-0.20181226105442-5d4384ee4fb2indirect
Gogithub.com/puerkitobio/goqueryv1.12.0indirect
Gogithub.com/quic-go/qpackv0.6.0indirect
Gogithub.com/quic-go/quic-gov0.59.0indirect
Gogithub.com/remyoudompheng/bigfftv0.0.0-20230129092748-24d4a6f8daecindirect
Gogithub.com/robfig/cron/v3v3.0.1indirect
Gogithub.com/rs/zerologv1.35.1indirect
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testifyv1.11.1indirect
Gogithub.com/twitchyliquid64/golang-asmv0.15.1indirect
Gogithub.com/ugorji/go/codecv1.3.1indirect
Gogo.mongodb.org/mongo-driver/v2v2.5.0indirect
Gogo.uber.org/atomic1.11.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/archv0.22.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/cryptov0.51.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.55.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/oauth2v0.36.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.45.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/textv0.37.0indirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.10indirect
Gogopkg.in/natefinch/lumberjack.v2v2.2.1indirect
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1indirect
Gomaragu.dev/gomponentsv1.3.0indirect
Gomaragu.dev/gomponents-htmxv0.6.1indirect
Gomodernc.org/libcv1.72.3indirect
Gomodernc.org/mathutilv1.7.1indirect
Gomodernc.org/memoryv1.11.0indirect
Gomodernc.org/sqlitev1.50.1indirect
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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with Kellerman81/go_media_downloader. Read them side by side →

96Flexget/FlexgetThe official FlexGet repositoryExceptional100openfga/openfgaA high performance and flexible authorization/permission engine built for developers and inspired by Google ZanzibarExceptional100moby/mobyThe Moby Project - a collaborative project for the container ecosystem to assemble container-based systemsExceptional100coder/coderSecure environments for developers and their agentsExceptional99go-gitea/giteaGit with a cup of tea! Painless self-hosted all-in-one software development service, including Git hosting, code review, team collaboration, package registry and CI/CDExceptional99gofiber/fiber⚡️ Express inspired web framework written in GoExceptional

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 v0.12.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics.