Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-20 07:08 UTC

Rails-Designer / rails_icons

Add any icon library to a Rails app. Support for Lucide, Phosphor, Heroicons and others

Ruby · JavaScript · HTMLMIT★ 324 stars⑂ 17 forkssince Feb 2024View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined

Rails-Designer/rails_icons holds a health index of 73 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (77/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (35/100). It was last updated 19 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

73
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.

73
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 64 is calibrated to 73 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Rails DesignerOrganization · verified domain
38 followers30 public repossince Sep 2023

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemsrails_icons1.9.0-1787 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

77Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 19 days ago
12.5/36Commit cadence — 18/52 weeks with commits
15.4/18Commit volume — 51 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 10 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year51
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push19
active_weeks_last_year18
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 14 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 87 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~47.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count14
latest_release_tagv1.9.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release87
mean_days_between_releases47.6
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?

56Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
40.7/60Stars — 324 stars
10/25Forks — 17 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks17
stars324
watchers1
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
58.7/80Total downloads — 447,848 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesrails_icons
dependents—
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads447,848
monthly_downloads—
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?

68Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 83% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 12 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled12
top_contributor_share0.826
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
26.9/30PR acceptance — 69/77 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 3/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs69
open_issues0
closed_issues35
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs8
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
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
11.4/25Owner reach — 38 followers of Rails-Designer
16.8/25Track record — 30 public repos, account ~2 yr old
Inputs used
followers38
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginRails-Designer
public_repos30
account_age_days1,088

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 87 days ago
20/20Version history — 17 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesrails_icons
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish87

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

66Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 9 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://railsdesigner.com/open-source/rails-icons/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 14 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsfeather-icons, heroicons, icons, rails, lucide-icon, lucide-icons, tabler-icons, phosphor, phosphor-icons, phosphoricons, boxicons, radix-icon, radix-icons, sidekickicons
has_wikino
homepagehttps://railsdesigner.com/open-source/rails-icons/
docs_sitehttps://railsdesigner.com/open-source/rails-icons/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

52Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 9 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 3/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
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 — 10 commit(s) and 2 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
3.5/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 7
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 — 64 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, 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
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories64
affected_packages16
assessed_packages86
unassessed_packages4
affected_by_severitycritical 2, high 7, moderate 4, low 3
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 86 resolved dependencies against OSV. 4 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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.

35Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
30.4/40Legible commit history — 57 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.57
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
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 agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Ruby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/48 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes18,556
source_files_sampled48
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

324GitHub stars
12contributors
51commits, last 12 months
19days since last push
14releases
1bus factor
0open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 17 ⇿
0Stars
17Forks
14Releases

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.

0481216201722024-042025-062026-07
Major 1Minor 10Patch 3

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.0 / 10
4.0aggregate

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 · 2026-09-20 07:08 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
9CI-Tests9 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 3/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
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
10Maintained10 commit(s) and 2 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
7SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 7
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities64 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsappraisal—Gemfile
RubyGemspropshaft—Gemfile
All dependencies 90

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 88 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsappraisal2.5.0direct
RubyGemspropshaft1.2.1direct
RubyGemsactioncable8.0.2indirect
RubyGemsactionmailbox8.0.2indirect
RubyGemsactionmailer8.0.2indirect
RubyGemsactionpack8.0.2indirect
RubyGemsactiontext8.0.2indirect
RubyGemsactionview8.0.2indirect
RubyGemsactivejob8.0.2indirect
RubyGemsactivemodel8.0.2indirect
RubyGemsactiverecord8.0.2indirect
RubyGemsactivestorage8.0.2indirect
RubyGemsactivesupport8.0.2indirect
RubyGemsast2.4.3indirect
RubyGemsbase640.3.0indirect
RubyGemsbenchmark0.4.1indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal3.2.2indirect
RubyGemsbuilder3.3.0indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.5indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool2.5.3indirect
RubyGemscrass1.0.6indirect
RubyGemsdate3.4.1indirect
RubyGemsdebug1.11.0indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.3indirect
RubyGemserb5.0.2indirect
RubyGemserubi1.13.1indirect
RubyGemsglobalid1.2.1indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.14.7indirect
RubyGemsicons—indirect
RubyGemsicons0.9.0indirect
RubyGemsio-console0.8.1indirect
RubyGemsirb1.15.2indirect
RubyGemsjson2.13.0indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.5indirect
RubyGemslint_roller1.1.0indirect
RubyGemslogger1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsloofah2.24.1indirect
RubyGemsmail2.8.1indirect
RubyGemsmarcel1.0.4indirect
RubyGemsmini_mime1.1.5indirect
RubyGemsmini_portile22.8.9indirect
RubyGemsminitest5.27.0indirect
RubyGemsnet-imap0.5.9indirect
RubyGemsnet-pop0.1.2indirect
RubyGemsnet-protocol0.2.2indirect
RubyGemsnet-smtp0.5.1indirect
RubyGemsnio4r2.7.4indirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.18.9indirect
RubyGemsparallel1.27.0indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.8.0indirect
RubyGemspg—indirect
RubyGemspp0.6.2indirect
RubyGemsprettyprint0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsprism1.4.0indirect
RubyGemspsych5.2.6indirect
RubyGemspuma—indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrack3.1.16indirect
RubyGemsrack-session2.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrack-test2.2.0indirect
RubyGemsrackup2.2.1indirect
RubyGemsrails—indirect
RubyGemsrails8.0.2indirect
RubyGemsrails-dom-testing2.3.0indirect
RubyGemsrails-html-sanitizer1.6.2indirect
RubyGemsrailties8.0.2indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrake13.3.0indirect
RubyGemsrdoc6.14.2indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.10.0indirect
RubyGemsreline0.6.2indirect
RubyGemsrubocop1.75.8indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.46.0indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-performance1.25.0indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemssecurerandom0.4.1indirect
RubyGemsstandard1.50.0indirect
RubyGemsstandard-custom1.0.2indirect
RubyGemsstandard-performance1.8.0indirect
RubyGemsstringio3.1.7indirect
RubyGemsthor1.4.0indirect
RubyGemstimeout0.4.3indirect
RubyGemstzinfo2.0.6indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-emoji4.2.0indirect
RubyGemsuri1.0.3indirect
RubyGemsuseragent0.16.11indirect
RubyGemswebsocket-driver0.8.0indirect
RubyGemswebsocket-extensions0.1.5indirect
RubyGemszeitwerk2.7.3indirect
Dependency advisories 16

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 86 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 16 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 4 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
activestorage8.0.2indirectcritical78.1.3.1
rack-session2.1.1indirectcritical12.1.2
activesupport8.0.2indirecthigh38.1.2.1
concurrent-ruby1.3.5indirecthigh31.3.7
erb5.0.2indirecthigh16.0.4
nokogiri1.18.9indirecthigh111.19.4
rack3.1.16indirecthigh193.2.6
uri1.0.3indirecthigh11.0.4
websocket-driver0.8.0indirecthigh40.8.2
activerecord8.0.2indirectmoderate18.0.2.1
loofah2.24.1indirectmoderate12.25.2
mail2.8.1indirectmoderate12.9.1
net-imap0.5.9indirectmoderate80.6.4.1
actionview8.0.2indirectlow18.1.2.1
json2.13.0indirectlow12.19.9
rails-html-sanitizer1.6.2indirectlow11.7.1

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 — RubyGems.