Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-08 20:00 UTC

RazrFalcon / memmap2-rs

cross-platform Rust API for memory mapped IO

RustApache-2.0★ 642 stars⑂ 114 forkssince Aug 2019forkView on GitHub ↗

RazrFalcon/memmap2-rs holds a health index of 60 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (75/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (31/100). It was last updated 40 days ago. 2 contributors account 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

Yevhenii ReiznerPersonal account
658 followers22 public repossince Apr 2011

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.iomemmap20.9.1122,861,4433647 days agofileiommapmemory-map

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

61Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 40 days ago
6.2/36Commit cadence9/52 weeks with commits
14.3/18Commit volume38 commits in the last year
9/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained9 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
commits_last_year38
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push40
active_weeks_last_year9
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases36 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recencylatest release 47 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~102 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count36
latest_release_tagv0.9.11
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release47
mean_days_between_releases102
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?

61Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
45.5/60Stars642 stars
17.1/25Forks114 forks
5.6/15Watchers11 watchers
Inputs used
forks114
stars642
watchers11
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
0/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeno
has_licenseno
readme_badges3
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads22,861,443 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesmemmap2
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads304,746,476
monthly_downloads22,861,443
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?

75Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 31% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth61 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled61
top_contributor_share0.307
How it's scored
34.9/42Issue resolution83% of issues closed
26/30PR acceptance78/90 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
9/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 9/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
merged_prs78
open_issues13
closed_issues64
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.831
closed_unmerged_prs12
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
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
20.3/25Owner reach658 followers of RazrFalcon
21.9/25Track record22 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers658
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginRazrFalcon
public_repos22
account_age_days5,597
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 47 days ago
20/20Version history36 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesmemmap2
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish47

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

31At Risk · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests12 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

15Critical
How it's scored
0/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://docs.rs/memmap2
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikino
homepage
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/memmap2
has_readmeno
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionno

Security

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

55Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.2/2.5CI-Tests12 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 9/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
6.8/7.5Maintained9 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 9
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
26.6/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories1 affected: owning_ref 0.4.1 (moderate)
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
37.2/40No advisories left outstanding1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 1,655 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories2
affected_packages1
assessed_packages15
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitymoderate 1
direct_affected_packages1
Matched the crates:memmap2@0.9.11 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 15 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.

44Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
20.3/40Legible commit history38 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.38
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapCargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
45.8/55Manageable file sizes1/6 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes76,783
source_files_sampled6
oversized_source_files1
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
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

642GitHub stars
61contributors
38commits, last 12 months
40days since last push
36releases
2bus factor
13open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 114 ⇿
0Stars
114Forks
35Releases

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.

02040608010012011432020-042023-062026-07
Major 0Minor 7Patch 28

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.7 / 10
4.7aggregate

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 · 2026-08-08 20:00 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
9CI-Tests12 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6Code-ReviewFound 9/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
9Maintained9 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 9
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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iostable_deref_trait1.0Cargo.toml
All dependencies 4

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 3 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.iostable_deref_traitdirect
crates.iolibcindirect
crates.ioowning_refindirect
crates.iotempfileindirect
Dependency advisories 1

Installing crates:memmap2@0.9.11 pulls in 15 packages, direct and transitive: 1 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
owning_ref0.4.1directmoderate2

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticscrates.io.