Public record
Software health reportschema 0.12.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 19:10 UTC

OpenVoiceOS / ovos-media

Python · QMLApache-2.0★ 3 stars⑂ 3 forkssince Jan 2024View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined
#openvoiceos

OpenVoiceOS/ovos-media holds a health index of 65 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (78/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (29/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

65
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.

65
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 60 is calibrated to 65 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

OpenVoiceOSOrganization
769 followers342 public repossince Oct 2020

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIovos-media0.3.0a33,006330 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

78Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

64Moderate
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
2.8/36Commit cadence — 4/52 weeks with commits
14.7/18Commit volume — 42 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_year42
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year4

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 33 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~2.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count33
latest_release_tag0.3.0a3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases2.7
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?

43Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

10Critical
How it's scored
4.9/60Stars — 3 stars
2.5/25Forks — 3 forks
2.7/15Watchers — 4 watchers
Inputs used
forks3
stars3
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

70Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

58Moderate
How it's scored
46.4/80Monthly downloads — 3,006 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesovos-media
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads3,006
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?

66Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

30At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 81% of commits
6.8/13.5Contributor breadth — 5 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled5
top_contributor_share0.813

Issue & PR responsiveness

52Moderate
How it's scored
21/42Issue resolution — 50% of issues closed
24.3/30PR acceptance — 34/42 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_prs34
open_issues3
closed_issues3
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.5
closed_unmerged_prs8
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.

Ownership & stewardship

94Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
20.8/25Owner reach — 769 followers of OpenVoiceOS
24.6/25Track record — 342 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers769
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified—
owner_loginOpenVoiceOS
public_repos342
account_age_days2,114
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 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 33 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesovos-media
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

71Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

68Good
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 13 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 9 out of 9 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

75Good
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
0/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 1 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsopenvoiceos
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionno

Security

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

43Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

43Weak
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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 9 out of 9 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
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 5 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
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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 — 13 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, 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.

29At Risk · 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)

41Weak
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/42 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes59,711
source_files_sampled42
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

3GitHub stars
5contributors
42commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
33releases
1bus factor
3open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.3 / 10
4.3aggregate

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 19:10 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests9 out of 9 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
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
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
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
0Vulnerabilities13 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 8
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIovos-utils~=0.0, >=0.1.0a13pyproject.toml
PyPIovos-bus-client~=1.3, >=1.3.7pyproject.toml
PyPIovos-config~=2.1,>=2.1.1pyproject.toml
PyPIovos-plugin-manager~=2.1, >=2.1pyproject.toml
PyPIovos-workshop>=0.0.15pyproject.toml
PyPIovos-gui-api-client>=0.0.2a1pyproject.toml
PyPIjson-database>=0.9.0pyproject.toml
PyPIdbus_next—pyproject.toml
All dependencies 79

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 12 direct and 67 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIdbus-next—direct
PyPIdbus-next0.2.3direct
PyPIjson-database0.10.1direct
PyPIovos-bus-client—direct
PyPIovos-bus-client1.5.0direct
PyPIovos-config—direct
PyPIovos-config2.1.1direct
PyPIovos-plugin-manager—direct
PyPIovos-plugin-manager2.2.0direct
PyPIovos-utils—direct
PyPIovos-utils0.8.5direct
PyPIovos-workshop8.0.0direct
PyPIattrs25.4.0indirect
PyPIaudioop-lts0.2.2indirect
PyPIbeautifulsoup44.14.3indirect
PyPIbidict0.23.1indirect
PyPIbitstruct8.22.1indirect
PyPIbs40.0.2indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.2.25indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.5indirect
PyPIclick8.3.1indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcombo-lock0.3.0indirect
PyPIfeedparser6.0.12indirect
PyPIfilelock3.25.2indirect
PyPIidna3.11indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata8.7.1indirect
PyPIkthread0.2.3indirect
PyPIlangcodes3.5.1indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.0.0indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImemory-tempfile2.2.3indirect
PyPImore-itertools8.14.0indirect
PyPIovos-number-parser0.5.1indirect
PyPIovos-ocp-files-plugin—indirect
PyPIovos-ocp-files-plugin0.13.1indirect
PyPIovos-ocp-m3u-plugin—indirect
PyPIovos-ocp-m3u-plugin0.0.1indirect
PyPIovos-ocp-news-plugin—indirect
PyPIovos-ocp-news-plugin0.1.2indirect
PyPIovos-ocp-rss-plugin—indirect
PyPIovos-ocp-rss-plugin0.1.2indirect
PyPIovos-ocp-youtube-plugin—indirect
PyPIovos-ocp-youtube-plugin0.0.6indirect
PyPIovos-plugin-common-play1.3.1indirect
PyPIovos-solver-yes-no-plugin0.2.8indirect
PyPIpadacioso1.0.0indirect
PyPIpexpect4.9.0indirect
PyPIpprintpp0.4.0indirect
PyPIptyprocess0.7.0indirect
PyPIpyee12.1.1indirect
PyPIpygments2.19.2indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpytube15.0.0indirect
PyPIpytz2026.1.post1indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIquebra-frases0.3.7indirect
PyPIrapidfuzz3.14.3indirect
PyPIregex2026.2.28indirect
PyPIrequests2.32.5indirect
PyPIrich13.9.4indirect
PyPIrich-click1.9.7indirect
PyPIsetuptools82.0.1indirect
PyPIsgmllib3k1.0.0indirect
PyPIsimplematch1.4indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsoupsieve2.8.3indirect
PyPIstandard-aifc3.13.0indirect
PyPIstandard-chunk3.13.0indirect
PyPItutubo2.0.2indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0indirect
PyPIunicode-rbnf2.4.0indirect
PyPIurllib32.6.3indirect
PyPIwatchdog6.0.0indirect
PyPIwebsocket-client1.9.0indirect
PyPIwrapt2.1.2indirect
PyPIyt-dlp2026.3.3indirect
PyPIytmusicapi1.11.5indirect
PyPIzipp3.23.0indirect
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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with OpenVoiceOS/ovos-media. Read them side by side →

80OpenVoiceOS/ovos-plugin-managerplugin manager for OpenVoiceOS , STT/TTS/Wakewords that can be used anywhereExcellent78OpenVoiceOS/ovos-bus-clientmessagebus client for the OVOS ecosystemGood75OpenVoiceOS/ovos-configOVOS configuration manager libraryGood73OpenVoiceOS/ovos-tts-serversimple flask server to host OpenVoiceOS tts plugins as a serviceGood71OpenVoiceOS/ovos-utilsGood71OpenVoiceOS/ovos-number-parserGood

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 — PyPI.