Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-10 21:24 UTC

RDFLib / rdflib

RDFLib is a Python library for working with RDF, a simple yet powerful language for representing information.

PythonBSD-3-Clause★ 2,511 stars⑂ 607 forkssince Feb 2012View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined
#rdflib#semantic-web#linked-data#python#pypi#ntriples#rdf-xml#json-ld#turtle#turtle-rdf#rdf#n3#nquads#serializer#parser#namespace#graph#uri#python-library#sparql

RDFLib/rdflib holds a health index of 95 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (100/100) and lowest on Security (69/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

95
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

95
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 82 is calibrated to 95 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

RDFlibOrganization
205 followers40 public repossince Feb 2012

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIrdflib7.6.015,400,07040209 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

71Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

77Good
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 1 days ago
13.8/36Commit cadence — 20/52 weeks with commits
17.1/18Commit volume — 80 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year80
human_commit_share0.74
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year20

Release discipline

63Moderate
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 22 releases published
16.2/36Release recency — latest release 209 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~102.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count22
latest_release_tag7.6.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release209
mean_days_between_releases102.9

Community & Adoption

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

93Exceptional · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

89Excellent
How it's scored
55.1/60Stars — 2,511 stars
23.2/25Forks — 607 forks
10.5/15Watchers — 77 watchers
Inputs used
forks607
stars2,511
watchers77
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (BSD-3-Clause)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges8
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, readthedocs.org, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

100Exceptional
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 15,400,070 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesrdflib
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads15,400,070
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?

78Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

77Good
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor — 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
17.1/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 24% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 97 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 91 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled97
top_contributor_share0.242

Issue & PR responsiveness

75Good
How it's scored
32.7/42Issue resolution — 78% of issues closed
22.4/30PR acceptance — 1,433/1,918 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
10.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 12/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
merged_prs1,433
open_issues301
closed_issues1,054
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d3
prs_merged_30d3
prs_decided_30d11
issue_closed_ratio0.778
closed_unmerged_prs485
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.

Ownership & stewardship

70Good
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
16.6/25Owner reach — 205 followers of RDFLib
23.7/25Track record — 40 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers205
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginRDFLib
public_repos40
account_age_days5,334

Package maintenance

91Excellent
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
26/35Publish recency — latest publish 209 days ago
20/20Version history — 40 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesrdflib
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish209

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

100Exceptional · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

100Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.black], [tool.isort]), tox.ini
9.6/9.6Pre-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_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://rdflib.readthedocs.org
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 20 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsrdflib, semantic-web, linked-data, python, pypi, ntriples, rdf-xml, json-ld, turtle, turtle-rdf, rdf, n3, nquads, serializer, parser, namespace, graph, uri, python-library, sparql
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://rdflib.readthedocs.org
docs_sitehttps://rdflib.readthedocs.org
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

69Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

61Moderate
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
0.5/2.5CII-Best-Practices — badge detected: InProgress
5.2/7.5Code-Review — Found 12/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 91 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 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
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 — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
6/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
2.2/7.5Vulnerabilities — 7 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate6.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection. 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_packages1
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:rdflib@7.6.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 1 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.

72Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 73 of 74 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.986
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

81Excellent
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Taskfile.yml, docs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.black], [tool.isort]), tox.ini
11/11Static type checking — rdflib/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 25 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesTaskfile.yml, docs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsrdflib/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.25

Code legibility for models

81Excellent
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (rdflib/py.typed)
54.1/55Manageable file sizes — 9/537 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes424,141
source_files_sampled537
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 — example, examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexample, examples
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

2,511GitHub stars
97contributors
80commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
22releases
3bus factor
301open 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 ★ / 607 ⇿
0Stars
607Forks
22Releases

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.

0100200300400500600597302012-022019-052026-09
Major 3Minor 8Patch 11

Each point covers 14 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.1 / 10
6.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-10 21:23 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
2CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: InProgress
7Code-ReviewFound 12/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
10Contributorsproject has 91 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 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
1Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
8Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
3Vulnerabilities7 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIisodate>=0.7.2,<1.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpyparsing>=3.1.0,<4pyproject.toml
All dependencies 123

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 119 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIisodate0.7.2direct
PyPIpyparsing3.0.9direct
PyPIpyparsing3.1.4direct
PyPIpyparsing3.3.2direct
PyPIannotated-doc0.0.4indirect
PyPIannotated-doc0.0.5indirect
PyPIanyio4.14.2indirect
PyPIanyio4.5.2indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.8.0indirect
PyPIberkeleydb18.1.10indirect
PyPIberkeleydb18.1.15indirect
PyPIblack24.8.0indirect
PyPIbuild1.2.2.post1indirect
PyPIbuild1.5.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2025.10.5indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.7.22indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.4indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.9indirect
PyPIclick8.1.8indirect
PyPIclick8.4.2indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverage7.15.4indirect
PyPIcoverage7.6.1indirect
PyPIcoveralls4.1.0indirect
PyPIdeepmerge2.1.0indirect
PyPIdocker7.1.0indirect
PyPIdocker7.2.0indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.0indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIghp-import2.1.0indirect
PyPIgriffelib2.1.0indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhtml5rdf1.2.1indirect
PyPIhttpcore1.0.9indirect
PyPIhttpx0.28.1indirect
PyPIidna3.11indirect
PyPIidna3.18indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata8.5.0indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata9.0.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.1.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIisort5.13.2indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIlibrt0.15.0indirect
PyPIlxml5.4.0indirect
PyPIlxml-stubs0.5.1indirect
PyPImarkdown3.10.3indirect
PyPImarkdown3.7indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe2.1.5indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImergedeep1.3.4indirect
PyPImkdocs1.6.1indirect
PyPImkdocs-autorefs1.4.3indirect
PyPImkdocs-autorefs1.4.4indirect
PyPImkdocs-get-deps0.2.0indirect
PyPImkdocs-get-deps0.2.2indirect
PyPImkdocstrings1.0.6indirect
PyPImkdocstrings-python2.0.5indirect
PyPImypy1.14.1indirect
PyPImypy2.3.1indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPInetworkx3.1indirect
PyPInetworkx3.4.2indirect
PyPInetworkx3.6.1indirect
PyPIorjson3.10.15indirect
PyPIorjson3.11.9indirect
PyPIpackaging25.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.3indirect
PyPIpathspec0.12.1indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIpip25.0.1indirect
PyPIpip26.2.1indirect
PyPIpip-tools7.5.2indirect
PyPIpip-tools7.6.1indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.11.2indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.3.6indirect
PyPIpluggy1.5.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpoetry1.8.5indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpymdown-extensions11.0.1indirect
PyPIpyproject-hooks1.2.0indirect
PyPIpytest8.3.5indirect
PyPIpytest8.4.2indirect
PyPIpytest-cov5.0.0indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-dotenv1.2.1indirect
PyPIpython-dotenv1.2.2indirect
PyPIpywin32311indirect
PyPIpywin32312indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIpyyaml-env-tag0.1indirect
PyPIpyyaml-env-tag1.1indirect
PyPIrdflib7.6.0indirect
PyPIrdflib7.7.0a0indirect
PyPIrequests2.32.4indirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2indirect
PyPIrich15.0.0indirect
PyPIruff0.15.0indirect
PyPIsetuptools71.1.0indirect
PyPIshellingham1.5.4indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsniffio1.3.1indirect
PyPItestcontainers4.13.3indirect
PyPItestcontainers4.15.0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItyper0.26.8indirect
PyPItyper0.27.1indirect
PyPItypes-setuptools71.1.0.20240818indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.13.2indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPIurllib32.2.3indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIwatchdog4.0.2indirect
PyPIwatchdog6.0.0indirect
PyPIwheel0.45.1indirect
PyPIwrapt2.0.1indirect
PyPIwrapt2.3.0indirect
PyPIzensical0.0.53indirect
PyPIzipp3.20.2indirect
PyPIzipp4.1.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:rdflib@7.6.0 pulls in 1 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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with RDFLib/rdflib. Read them side by side →

98linkml/linkmlLinked Open Data Modeling LanguageExceptional99pypa/cibuildwheel🎡 Build Python wheels for all the platforms with minimal configuration. Exceptional98pypa/pipxInstall and Run Python Applications in Isolated EnvironmentsExceptional98neo4j/neo4j-python-driverNeo4j Bolt driver for PythonExceptional98bokeh/bokehInteractive Data Visualization in the browser, from PythonExceptional98mongodb/mongo-python-driverPyMongo - the Official MongoDB Python driverExceptional

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.