Software health reportschema 0.26.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-22 08:51 UTC

PiSCSI / piscsi

PiSCSI allows a Raspberry Pi to function as emulated SCSI devices (hard disk, CD-ROM, and others) for vintage SCSI-based computers and devices. This is a fork of the RaSCSI project by GIMONS.

C++ · PythonBSD-3-Clause★ 605 stars⑂ 88 forkssince Jul 2020View on GitHub ↗

#macintosh #scsi #rascsi #raspberry-pi #vintage-macintosh-computers #scsi-devices #piscsi

PiSCSI/piscsi holds a health index of 77 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (89/100) and lowest on Security (55/100). It was last updated 9 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

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.

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)

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 66 is calibrated to 77 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

PiSCSI (Formerly RaSCSI Reloaded)Organization

31 followers4 public repossince Nov 2022

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

60Moderate · 21% of overall

Development activity

63Moderate

How it's scored

28.8/36	Push recency — last push 9 days ago
14.5/36	Commit cadence — 21/52 weeks with commits
18/18	Commit volume — 173 commits in the last year
2/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2

Inputs used

commits_last_year	173
human_commit_share	0.38
days_since_last_push	9
active_weeks_last_year	21

Release discipline

56Moderate

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 15 releases published
16.2/36	Release recency — latest release 201 days ago
12.6/27	Release cadence — a release every ~148.2 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.

Inputs used

releases_count	15
latest_release_tag	v25.12.01
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	201
mean_days_between_releases	148.2

Community & Adoption

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

63Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

68Good

How it's scored

45.1/60	Stars — 605 stars
16.2/25	Forks — 88 forks
6.8/15	Watchers — 18 watchers

Inputs used

forks	88
stars	605
watchers	18
growth_state	organic
growth_factor_pct	100

Community health

58Moderate

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (BSD-3-Clause)
0/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5	Code of conduct
7.2/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	—
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	yes
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	—
has_pull_request_template	no

Sustainability & Governance

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

63Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

43Weak

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
10.7/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 52% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 37 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 10 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	37
top_contributor_share	0.523

Issue & PR responsiveness

82Excellent

How it's scored

39.4/42	Issue resolution — 94% of issues closed
26.2/30	PR acceptance — 922/1,055 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
6/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 2/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4

Inputs used

merged_prs	922
open_issues	37
closed_issues	560
prs_merged_7d	—
prs_decided_7d	—
prs_merged_30d	—
prs_decided_30d	—
issue_closed_ratio	0.938
closed_unmerged_prs	133
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

67Good

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
10.8/25	Owner reach — 31 followers of PiSCSI
12.5/25	Track record — 4 public repos, account ~3 yr old

Inputs used

followers	31
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	—
owner_login	PiSCSI
public_repos	4
account_age_days	1,345

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

89Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

82Excellent

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — .flake8, .pylintrc
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
18/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 28 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	yes
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

100Exceptional

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://piscsi.org
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 7 topics
10/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	macintosh, scsi, rascsi, raspberry-pi, vintage-macintosh-computers, scsi-devices, piscsi
has_wiki	yes
homepage	https://piscsi.org
docs_site	https://piscsi.org
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	yes
has_description	yes

Security

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

55Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

44Weak

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — no data
2.2/2.5	CI-Tests — 28 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3/7.5	Code-Review — Found 2/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 10 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
1.5/7.5	Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
5/5	Packaging — packaging workflow detected
1/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
0/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 33 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	17
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	1
scorecard_aggregate	4.4

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	53
affected_packages	12
assessed_packages	175
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	critical 2, high 4, moderate 5, low 1
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 175 resolved dependencies against OSV. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. 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.

64Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

28At Risk

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
28.1/40	Legible commit history — 20 of 38 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.526
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

82Excellent

How it's scored

18/18	One-command bootstrap — cpp/Makefile
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — .flake8, .pylintrc
11/11	Static type checking — C++ (statically typed)
10/10	Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8	Automated maintenance — 62 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
2/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	package-lock.json
has_dockerfile	yes
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	cpp/Makefile
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	—
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.62

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — C++ (statically typed)
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/234 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	C++
largest_source_bytes	52,645
source_files_sampled	234
oversized_source_files	0

Machine-readable interfaces

50Moderate

How it's scored

40/40	API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — proto/piscsi_interface.proto
0/20	MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
0/40	Runnable examples

Inputs used

example_dirs	—
has_mcp_signal	no
api_schema_files	proto/piscsi_interface.proto
interfaces_expected_of	—

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

605GitHub stars

37contributors

173commits, last 12 months

9days since last push

15releases

1bus factor

37open issues

PyPIpackage ecosystems

More detail

Star and fork history 605 ★ / 88 ⇿

605Stars

88Forks

15Releases

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.

Major 0Minor 0Patch 15

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.4 / 10

4.4aggregate

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 · 2026-07-22 08:51 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
n/a	Branch-Protection	internal 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
9	CI-Tests	28 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4	Code-Review	Found 2/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
10	Contributors	project has 10 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
2	Maintained	2 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
10	Packaging	packaging workflow detected
2	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
0	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
0	Signed-Releases	Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0	Vulnerabilities	33 existing vulnerabilities detected

All dependencies 175

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 175 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
npm	@babel/code-frame	`7.27.1`	indirect
npm	@babel/helper-validator-identifier	`7.28.5`	indirect
npm	@cacheable/memory	`2.0.5`	indirect
npm	@cacheable/utils	`2.3.1`	indirect
npm	@csstools/css-parser-algorithms	`3.0.5`	indirect
npm	@csstools/css-syntax-patches-for-csstree	`1.0.20`	indirect
npm	@csstools/css-tokenizer	`3.0.4`	indirect
npm	@csstools/media-query-list-parser	`4.0.3`	indirect
npm	@csstools/selector-specificity	`5.0.0`	indirect
npm	@dual-bundle/import-meta-resolve	`4.2.1`	indirect
npm	@keyv/bigmap	`1.3.0`	indirect
npm	@keyv/serialize	`1.1.1`	indirect
npm	@nodelib/fs.scandir	`2.1.5`	indirect
npm	@nodelib/fs.stat	`2.0.5`	indirect
npm	@nodelib/fs.walk	`1.2.8`	indirect
npm	ajv	`8.17.1`	indirect
npm	ansi-regex	`5.0.1`	indirect
npm	ansi-styles	`4.3.0`	indirect
npm	argparse	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	array-union	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	astral-regex	`2.0.0`	indirect
npm	balanced-match	`2.0.0`	indirect
npm	braces	`3.0.3`	indirect
npm	cacheable	`2.2.0`	indirect
npm	callsites	`3.1.0`	indirect
npm	color-convert	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	color-name	`1.1.4`	indirect
npm	colord	`2.9.3`	indirect
npm	cosmiconfig	`9.0.0`	indirect
npm	css-functions-list	`3.2.3`	indirect
npm	css-tree	`3.1.0`	indirect
npm	cssesc	`3.0.0`	indirect
npm	debug	`4.4.3`	indirect
npm	dir-glob	`3.0.1`	indirect
npm	emoji-regex	`8.0.0`	indirect
npm	env-paths	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	error-ex	`1.3.4`	indirect
npm	fast-deep-equal	`3.1.3`	indirect
npm	fast-glob	`3.3.3`	indirect
npm	fast-uri	`3.1.2`	indirect
npm	fastest-levenshtein	`1.0.16`	indirect
npm	fastq	`1.13.0`	indirect
npm	file-entry-cache	`11.1.1`	indirect
npm	fill-range	`7.1.1`	indirect
npm	flat-cache	`6.1.19`	indirect
npm	flatted	`3.4.2`	indirect
npm	glob-parent	`5.1.2`	indirect
npm	global-modules	`2.0.0`	indirect
npm	global-prefix	`3.0.0`	indirect
npm	globby	`11.1.0`	indirect
npm	globjoin	`0.1.4`	indirect
npm	has-flag	`4.0.0`	indirect
npm	hashery	`1.2.0`	indirect
npm	hookified	`1.13.0`	indirect
npm	html-tags	`3.3.1`	indirect
npm	ignore	`5.2.4`	indirect
npm	ignore	`7.0.5`	indirect
npm	import-fresh	`3.3.1`	indirect
npm	imurmurhash	`0.1.4`	indirect
npm	ini	`1.3.8`	indirect
npm	is-arrayish	`0.2.1`	indirect
npm	is-extglob	`2.1.1`	indirect
npm	is-fullwidth-code-point	`3.0.0`	indirect
npm	is-glob	`4.0.3`	indirect
npm	is-number	`7.0.0`	indirect
npm	is-plain-object	`5.0.0`	indirect
npm	isexe	`2.0.0`	indirect
npm	js-tokens	`4.0.0`	indirect
npm	js-yaml	`4.1.1`	indirect
npm	json-parse-even-better-errors	`2.3.1`	indirect
npm	json-schema-traverse	`1.0.0`	indirect
npm	keyv	`5.5.4`	indirect
npm	kind-of	`6.0.3`	indirect
npm	known-css-properties	`0.37.0`	indirect
npm	lines-and-columns	`1.2.4`	indirect
npm	lodash.truncate	`4.4.2`	indirect
npm	mathml-tag-names	`2.1.3`	indirect
npm	mdn-data	`2.12.2`	indirect
npm	meow	`13.2.0`	indirect
npm	merge2	`1.4.1`	indirect
npm	micromatch	`4.0.8`	indirect
npm	ms	`2.1.3`	indirect
npm	nanoid	`3.3.11`	indirect
npm	normalize-path	`3.0.0`	indirect
npm	parent-module	`1.0.1`	indirect
npm	parse-json	`5.2.0`	indirect
npm	path-type	`4.0.0`	indirect
npm	picocolors	`1.1.1`	indirect
npm	picomatch	`2.3.2`	indirect
npm	postcss	`8.5.6`	indirect
npm	postcss-resolve-nested-selector	`0.1.6`	indirect
npm	postcss-safe-parser	`7.0.1`	indirect
npm	postcss-selector-parser	`7.1.0`	indirect
npm	postcss-value-parser	`4.2.0`	indirect
npm	prettier	`3.8.1`	indirect
npm	qified	`0.5.2`	indirect
npm	queue-microtask	`1.2.3`	indirect
npm	require-from-string	`2.0.2`	indirect
npm	resolve-from	`4.0.0`	indirect
npm	resolve-from	`5.0.0`	indirect
npm	reusify	`1.0.4`	indirect
npm	run-parallel	`1.2.0`	indirect
npm	signal-exit	`4.0.2`	indirect
npm	slash	`3.0.0`	indirect
npm	slice-ansi	`4.0.0`	indirect
npm	source-map-js	`1.2.1`	indirect
npm	string-width	`4.2.3`	indirect
npm	strip-ansi	`6.0.1`	indirect
npm	stylelint	`16.26.1`	indirect
npm	stylelint-config-recommended	`17.0.0`	indirect
npm	stylelint-config-standard	`39.0.1`	indirect
npm	supports-color	`7.2.0`	indirect
npm	supports-hyperlinks	`3.2.0`	indirect
npm	svg-tags	`1.0.0`	indirect
npm	table	`6.9.0`	indirect
npm	to-regex-range	`5.0.1`	indirect
npm	util-deprecate	`1.0.2`	indirect
npm	which	`1.3.1`	indirect
npm	write-file-atomic	`5.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	adafruit-blinka	`8.50.0`	indirect
PyPI	adafruit-circuitpython-busdevice	`5.2.15`	indirect
PyPI	adafruit-circuitpython-connectionmanager	`3.1.6`	indirect
PyPI	adafruit-circuitpython-framebuf	`1.6.10`	indirect
PyPI	adafruit-circuitpython-requests	`4.1.15`	indirect
PyPI	adafruit-circuitpython-ssd1306	`2.12.22`	indirect
PyPI	adafruit-circuitpython-typing	`1.12.3`	indirect
PyPI	adafruit-platformdetect	`3.88.0`	indirect
PyPI	adafruit-pureio	`1.1.11`	indirect
PyPI	babel	`2.18.0`	indirect
PyPI	bjoern	`3.2.2`	indirect
PyPI	black	`25.11.0`	indirect
PyPI	blinker	`1.9.0`	indirect
PyPI	certifi	`2026.2.25`	indirect
PyPI	charset-normalizer	`3.4.6`	indirect
PyPI	click	`8.1.8`	indirect
PyPI	exceptiongroup	`1.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	flake8	`7.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	flask	`3.1.3`	indirect
PyPI	flask-babel	`4.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	idna	`3.11`	indirect
PyPI	importlib-metadata	`8.7.1`	indirect
PyPI	iniconfig	`2.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	itsdangerous	`2.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	jinja2	`3.1.6`	indirect
PyPI	luma-core	`2.5.3`	indirect
PyPI	luma-oled	`3.15.0`	indirect
PyPI	markupsafe	`2.1.5`	indirect
PyPI	mccabe	`0.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	mypy-extensions	`1.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	packaging	`26.0`	indirect
PyPI	pathspec	`1.0.4`	indirect
PyPI	pillow	`11.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	platformdirs	`4.3.6`	indirect
PyPI	pluggy	`1.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	pycodestyle	`2.14.0`	indirect
PyPI	pyflakes	`3.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	pyftdi	`0.57.1`	indirect
PyPI	pygments	`2.19.2`	indirect
PyPI	pyserial	`3.5`	indirect
PyPI	pytest	`8.4.2`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-httpserver	`1.1.3`	indirect
PyPI	python-pam	`2.0.2`	indirect
PyPI	pytokens	`0.4.1`	indirect
PyPI	pytz	`2026.1.post1`	indirect
PyPI	pyusb	`1.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	requests	`2.32.5`	indirect
PyPI	rpi-ws281x	`5.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	tomli	`2.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	typing-extensions	`4.15.0`	indirect
PyPI	ua-parser	`1.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	urllib3	`2.6.3`	indirect
PyPI	vcgencmd	`0.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	watchdog	`6.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	werkzeug	`3.1.6`	indirect
PyPI	zipp	`3.23.0`	indirect

Dependency advisories 12

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 175 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 12 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
black	`25.11.0`	indirect	critical	3	`26.3.1`
pillow	`11.3.0`	indirect	critical	31	`12.3.0`
click	`8.1.8`	indirect	high	1	`8.3.3`
fast-uri	`3.1.2`	indirect	high	2	`4.1.1`
js-yaml	`4.1.1`	indirect	high	2	`4.3.0`
urllib3	`2.6.3`	indirect	high	4	`2.7.0`
ajv	`8.17.1`	indirect	moderate	1	`8.18.0`
idna	`3.11`	indirect	moderate	2	`3.15`
postcss	`8.5.6`	indirect	moderate	1	`8.5.10`
pytest	`8.4.2`	indirect	moderate	2	`9.0.3`
requests	`2.32.5`	indirect	moderate	2	`2.33.0`
pygments	`2.19.2`	indirect	low	2	`2.20.0`

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.

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 v0.26.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Metrics by category

Key facts

More detail

Feedback

Related records