Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-28 20:38 UTC

RohanNagar / jmail

A modern and lightweight library for working with email addresses in Java

JavaMIT★ 192 stars⑂ 19 forkssince May 2021View on GitHub ↗

RohanNagar/jmail holds a health index of 77 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (78/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (47/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

77
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.

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

Ownership

Rohan NagarPersonal account
33 followers36 public repossince Sep 2013@box

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 publish
Mavencom.sanctionco.jmail:jmail2.2.0-2731 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

78Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 1 days ago
19.4/36Commit cadence28/52 weeks with commits
15.8/18Commit volume57 commits in the last year
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained9 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
commits_last_year57
human_commit_share0.44
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year28
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases27 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 31 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~128.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count27
latest_release_tagv2.2.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release31
mean_days_between_releases128.4

Community & Adoption

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

50Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
37/60Stars192 stars
10.5/25Forks19 forks
2.7/15Watchers4 watchers
Inputs used
forks19
stars192
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges3
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicescodecov.io, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

62Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.8/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 96% of commits
9.5/13.5Contributor breadth7 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled7
top_contributor_share0.965
How it's scored
41.1/42Issue resolution98% of issues closed
29.3/30PR acceptance316/323 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs316
open_issues1
closed_issues46
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.979
closed_unmerged_prs7
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
11/25Owner reach33 followers of RohanNagar
23.4/25Track record36 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers33
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginRohanNagar
public_repos36
account_age_days4,721
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 maven
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 31 days ago
20/20Version history27 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagescom.sanctionco.jmail:jmail
ecosystemsmaven
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish31

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

77Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests26 out of 26 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

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://www.rohannagar.com/jmail
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics20 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsjava, email, validation, emails, library, fast, modern, valid, ip, ipv6, ipv4, addresses, parsing, parser, rfc, validator, lexer, utility, mail, address
has_wikino
homepagehttps://www.rohannagar.com/jmail
docs_sitehttps://www.rohannagar.com/jmail
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

63Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests26 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno data
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
1.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
6/7.5Maintained9 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
5/5SASTSAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6/7.5Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate5.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, CII-Best-Practices, Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages20
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
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 20 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.

47Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
12.1/40Legible commit history10 of 44 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.227
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrappom.xml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingJava (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance56 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestspom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.56
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeJava (statically typed)
53.7/55Manageable file sizes1/41 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJava
largest_source_bytes89,501
source_files_sampled41
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

192GitHub stars
7contributors
57commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
27releases
1bus factor
1open issues
Mavenpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 19 ⇿
0Stars
19Forks
23Releases

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.

0481216201922021-052023-112026-05
Major 1Minor 7Patch 15

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.4 / 10
5.4aggregate

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 · 2026-08-28 20:37 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-Tests26 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
n/aCII-Best-Practicesinternal error: error during json parsing: error during json.Unmarshal: invalid character '<' looking for beginning of value
0Code-ReviewFound 0/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
8Maintained9 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 8
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
10SASTSAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Mavencom.puppycrawl.tools:checkstyle${checkstyle.version}pom.xml
All dependencies 20

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 19 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavencom.puppycrawl.tools:checkstyle10.26.1direct
Mavencom.github.bbottema:emailaddress-rfc28222.3.1indirect
Mavencom.sun.mail:jakarta.mail2.0.2indirect
Mavencom.sun.mail:javax.mail1.6.2indirect
Mavencommons-validator:commons-validator1.11.0indirect
Mavennet.andreinc:mockneat0.4.8indirect
Mavennl.jqno.equalsverifier:equalsverifier3.19.4indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-checkstyle-plugin3.6.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin3.15.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-gpg-plugin3.2.8indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-javadoc-plugin3.12.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-release-plugin3.3.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-source-plugin3.4.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin3.5.6indirect
Mavenorg.assertj:assertj-core3.27.7indirect
Mavenorg.jacoco:jacoco-maven-plugin0.8.15indirect
Mavenorg.junit.jupiter:junit-jupiter-engine5.14.4indirect
Mavenorg.junit.jupiter:junit-jupiter-params5.14.4indirect
Mavenorg.mockito:mockito-core5.23.0indirect
Mavenorg.sonatype.central:central-publishing-maven-plugin0.11.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 20 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

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.

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 statisticsMaven.