Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-17 13:36 UTC

Kludex / zuvloop

A libuv event loop for asyncio, written in Zig.

Python · ZigMIT★ 62 stars⑂ 3 forkssince Aug 2026View on GitHub ↗

Kludex/zuvloop holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (78/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (51/100). It was last updated today. 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

Marcelo TrylesinskiPersonal account
3,287 followers183 public repossince Apr 2014@pydantic

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
PyPIzuvloop0.0.17116,496171 day agoasyncioevent-looplibuvuvloopzig

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

75Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
4.8/36Commit cadence — 7/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 254 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
Inputs used
commits_last_year254
human_commit_share0.96
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year7

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 17 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 1 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~3.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count17
latest_release_tagv0.0.17
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1
mean_days_between_releases3.1
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?

51Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
29/60Stars — 62 stars
2.5/25Forks — 3 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks3
stars62
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
67.6/80Monthly downloads — 116,496 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageszuvloop
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads116,496
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?

63Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 99% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth — 3 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.988
How it's scored
26/42Issue resolution — 62% of issues closed
28.3/30PR acceptance — 152/161 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
7.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 15/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
merged_prs152
open_issues8
closed_issues13
prs_merged_7d8
prs_decided_7d8
prs_merged_30d54
prs_decided_30d54
issue_closed_ratio0.619
closed_unmerged_prs9
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 backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
25/25Owner reach — 3,287 followers of Kludex
25/25Track record — 183 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers3,287
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginKludex
public_repos183
account_age_days4,532
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 1 days ago
20/20Version history — 17 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageszuvloop
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish1

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikino
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?

67Good · 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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 15/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 8 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
0/7.5Maintained — project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
4.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
2/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 42 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate5.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages2
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 pypi:zuvloop@0.0.17 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 2 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.

78Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 96 of 96 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes571
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checking — zuvloop/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 4 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
9/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configszuvloop/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.04
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (zuvloop/py.typed)
53.9/55Manageable file sizes — 1/51 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes88,440
source_files_sampled51
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

62GitHub stars
3contributors
254commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
17releases
1bus factor
8open issues
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 ★ / 3 ⇿
0Stars
3Forks
7Releases

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.

12233312026-082026-082026-08
Major 0Minor 0Patch 7
OpenSSF Scorecard 5.9 / 10
5.9aggregate

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 · 2026-09-17 13:36 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5Code-ReviewFound 15/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
10Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
9Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
4Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
0Vulnerabilities42 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIopentelemetry-api>=1.23pyproject.toml
PyPItyping-extensions>=4.15pyproject.toml
All dependencies 104

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 101 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIopentelemetry-api1.44.0direct
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0direct
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0direct
PyPIaiodns4.0.4indirect
PyPIaiohappyeyeballs2.6.2indirect
PyPIaiohappyeyeballs2.7.1indirect
PyPIaiohttp3.14.3indirect
PyPIaiosignal1.4.0indirect
PyPIannotated-types0.7.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.14.2indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.5.0indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.6.0indirect
PyPIasync-timeout5.0.1indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIblockbuster1.5.26indirect
PyPIbrotli1.2.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.7.22indirect
PyPIcffi2.0.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.5.1indirect
PyPIclick8.4.1indirect
PyPIclick8.4.2indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverage7.14.1indirect
PyPIcoverage7.15.3indirect
PyPIcryptography50.0.0indirect
PyPIdeepmerge2.1.0indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIexecnet2.1.2indirect
PyPIexecuting2.2.1indirect
PyPIforbiddenfruit0.1.4indirect
PyPIfreezegun1.5.5indirect
PyPIfrozenlist1.8.0indirect
PyPIgoogleapis-common-protos1.75.3indirect
PyPIgunicorn26.0.0indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhatch-vcs0.5.0indirect
PyPIhatch-ziglang0.2.1indirect
PyPIhatchling1.32.0indirect
PyPIhttptools0.8.0indirect
PyPIhypothesis6.165.10indirect
PyPIidna3.17indirect
PyPIidna3.18indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIlibrt0.11.0indirect
PyPIlibrt0.13.0indirect
PyPIlogfire5.1.0indirect
PyPImarkdown3.10.3indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImultidict6.7.1indirect
PyPImypy2.1.0indirect
PyPImypy2.3.0indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-exporter-otlp-proto-common1.44.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-exporter-otlp-proto-http1.44.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-instrumentation0.65b0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-proto1.44.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-sdk1.44.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-semantic-conventions0.65b0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIpkgconfig1.6.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpropcache0.5.2indirect
PyPIprotobuf7.36.1indirect
PyPIproxy-py2.4.10indirect
PyPIpycares5.0.1indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpydantic2.13.4indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.46.4indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpymdown-extensions11.0.1indirect
PyPIpytest9.0.3indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-codspeed5.0.3indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpytest-mock3.15.1indirect
PyPIpytest-timeout2.4.0indirect
PyPIpytest-xdist3.8.0indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-on-whales0.81.0indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2indirect
PyPIrich15.0.0indirect
PyPIrloop0.5.0indirect
PyPIruff0.16.3indirect
PyPIsetuptools-git1.2indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsortedcontainers2.4.0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItrustme1.2.1indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.2indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIuvicorn0.52.4indirect
PyPIuvloop0.22.1indirect
PyPIwait-for-it2.3.0indirect
PyPIwrapt2.4.1indirect
PyPIyarl1.24.2indirect
PyPIyarl1.24.5indirect
PyPIzensical0.0.56indirect
PyPIziglang0.16.0indirect
PyPIzlib-ng1.0.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:zuvloop@0.0.17 pulls in 2 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 statistics — PyPI.