Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-11 11:51 UTC

LogBrewCo / sdk

Official LogBrew SDKs for sending logs, traces, issues, and actions from apps and services.

Shell · Python · JavaScriptMIT★ 4 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Jun 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryMobile applicationhow this is determined

LogBrewCo/sdk holds a health index of 60 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (84/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (25/100). It was last updated 6 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

60
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.

60
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 57 is calibrated to 60 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

LogBrewOrganization
2 followers5 public repossince May 2026

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagistlogbrew/sdkv0.1.1920206 days agologgingpsr-3observabilitylogbrew

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

84Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

74Good
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 6 days ago
9.7/36Commit cadence — 14/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 861 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year861
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push6
active_weeks_last_year14

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 78 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 6 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~0.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count78
latest_release_tagjava/logbrew-java/v0.1.8
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release6
mean_days_between_releases0.1
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?

25At Risk · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

8Critical
How it's scored
7.7/60Stars — 4 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars4
watchers0
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 (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

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

18Critical
How it's scored
17.6/80Monthly downloads — 20 downloads/month across packagist
0/20Registry dependents — 0 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packageslogbrew/sdk
dependents0
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads57
monthly_downloads20
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

48Weak · 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

58Moderate
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
26.2/30PR acceptance — 255/292 decided PRs merged
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_prs255
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d13
prs_decided_7d13
prs_merged_30d60
prs_decided_30d60
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs37
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

40Weak
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
3.4/25Owner reach — 2 followers of LogBrewCo
6.4/25Track record — 5 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers2
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginLogBrewCo
public_repos5
account_age_days132

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 6 days ago
20/20Version history — 20 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageslogbrew/sdk
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish6

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

74Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

74Good
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.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_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

75Good
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
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?

41Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

41Weak
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
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
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
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
1.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
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
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 40 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Signed-Releases. 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.

78Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

85Excellent
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 99 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.99
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes5,332

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

64Moderate
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — c/logbrew-c/Makefile, c/logbrew-c/examples/Makefile, cpp/logbrew-cpp/Makefile, cpp/logbrew-cpp/examples/Makefile, dotnet/logbrew-dotnet/examples/Makefile, go/logbrew/examples/Makefile, go/logbrew/examples/real_user_smoke/Makefile, java/logbrew-java/examples/Makefile, kotlin/logbrew-kotlin/examples/Makefile, objc/logbrew-objc/Makefile, objc/logbrew-objc/examples/Makefile, php/logbrew-php/examples/Makefile, ruby/logbrew-ruby/examples/Makefile, rust/logbrew/examples/Makefile, swift/logbrew-swift/examples/Makefile, unity/logbrew-unity/examples/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — python/logbrew_django/src/logbrew_django/py.typed, python/logbrew_fastapi/src/logbrew_fastapi/py.typed, python/logbrew_flask/src/logbrew_flask/py.typed, python/logbrew_py/src/logbrew_sdk/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesc/logbrew-c/Makefile, c/logbrew-c/examples/Makefile, cpp/logbrew-cpp/Makefile, cpp/logbrew-cpp/examples/Makefile, dotnet/logbrew-dotnet/examples/Makefile, go/logbrew/examples/Makefile, go/logbrew/examples/real_user_smoke/Makefile, java/logbrew-java/examples/Makefile, kotlin/logbrew-kotlin/examples/Makefile, objc/logbrew-objc/Makefile, objc/logbrew-objc/examples/Makefile, php/logbrew-php/examples/Makefile, ruby/logbrew-ruby/examples/Makefile, rust/logbrew/examples/Makefile, swift/logbrew-swift/examples/Makefile, unity/logbrew-unity/examples/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configspython/logbrew_django/src/logbrew_django/py.typed, python/logbrew_fastapi/src/logbrew_fastapi/py.typed, python/logbrew_flask/src/logbrew_flask/py.typed, python/logbrew_py/src/logbrew_sdk/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, dotnet/logbrew-dotnet/src/LogBrew.AspNetCore/LogBrew.AspNetCore.csproj, dotnet/logbrew-dotnet/src/LogBrew.EntityFrameworkCore/LogBrew.EntityFrameworkCore.csproj, dotnet/logbrew-dotnet/src/LogBrew.Hangfire/LogBrew.Hangfire.csproj, dotnet/logbrew-dotnet/src/LogBrew.HttpClient/LogBrew.HttpClient.csproj, dotnet/logbrew-dotnet/src/LogBrew.OpenTelemetry/LogBrew.OpenTelemetry.csproj, dotnet/logbrew-dotnet/src/LogBrew.StackExchangeRedis/LogBrew.StackExchangeRedis.csproj, dotnet/logbrew-dotnet/src/LogBrew/LogBrew.csproj, dotnet/logbrew-dotnet/tests/LogBrew.AspNetCore.Tests/LogBrew.AspNetCore.Tests.csproj, dotnet/logbrew-dotnet/tests/LogBrew.EntityFrameworkCore.Tests/LogBrew.EntityFrameworkCore.Tests.csproj, dotnet/logbrew-dotnet/tests/LogBrew.Hangfire.Tests/LogBrew.Hangfire.Tests.csproj, dotnet/logbrew-dotnet/tests/LogBrew.HttpClient.Tests/LogBrew.HttpClient.Tests.csproj, dotnet/logbrew-dotnet/tests/LogBrew.OpenTelemetry.Tests/LogBrew.OpenTelemetry.Tests.csproj, dotnet/logbrew-dotnet/tests/LogBrew.StackExchangeRedis.Tests/LogBrew.StackExchangeRedis.Tests.csproj, dotnet/logbrew-dotnet/tests/LogBrew.Tests/LogBrew.Tests.csproj, go/logbrew/asynq/go.mod, go/logbrew/gin/go.mod, go/logbrew/go.mod, go/logbrew/otel/go.mod, java/logbrew-java/pom.xml, js/logbrew-react-native/android/build.gradle, js/logbrew-react-native/test/android-gradle-smoke/build.gradle, kotlin/logbrew-kotlin-okhttp/pom.xml, kotlin/logbrew-kotlin/pom.xml, rust/logbrew/Cargo.toml, tools/toolchain-probe/go.mod, unity/logbrew-unity/tests/LogBrew.Unity.Compatibility/LogBrew.Unity.Compatibility.csproj, unity/logbrew-unity/tests/LogBrew.Unity.Tests/LogBrew.Unity.Tests.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

82Excellent
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Shell with type-check config (python/logbrew_django/src/logbrew_django/py.typed, python/logbrew_fastapi/src/logbrew_fastapi/py.typed, python/logbrew_flask/src/logbrew_flask/py.typed, python/logbrew_py/src/logbrew_sdk/py.typed)
54.6/55Manageable file sizes — 9/1,246 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageShell
largest_source_bytes133,079
source_files_sampled1,246
oversized_source_files9

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples
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

4GitHub stars
1contributors
861commits, last 12 months
6days since last push
78releases
1bus factor
0open issues
crates.io, Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.1 / 10
4.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-11 11:50 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
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
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
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
3Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities40 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistpsr/log^3.0composer.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

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 LogBrewCo/sdk. Read them side by side →

96aya-rs/ayaAya is an eBPF library for the Rust programming language, built with a focus on developer experience and operability.Exceptional94DataDog/datadog-agentMain repository for Datadog AgentExceptional90Seldaek/monologSends your logs to files, sockets, inboxes, databases and various web servicesExcellent89sebastienrousseau/rlgNear-lock-free structured logging for Rust: a 65,536-slot ring buffer, formatting deferred to a background thread, 14 output formats (JSON, ECS, GELF, OTLP, logfmt…) and native os_log/journald sinks. Plus an OTLP/HTTP exporter, an MCP server for AI agents, Tower middleware, PII redaction, WebAssembly bindings and a jq-style CLI.Excellent88madesroches/micromegasUnified observability for logs, metrics and traces — low overhead instrumentation (Rust, Unreal Engine 5), OTLP ingestion, SQL analytics on DataFusion over Parquet, presentation through notebooks, Grafana and Python. Self-hosted.Excellent86provide-io/provide-telemetryUnified telemetry library for the provide.io ecosystem — structured logging, distributed tracing, and metricsExcellent

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 — Packagist.