Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-19 16:37 UTC

RustAudio / cpal

Low-level cross-platform audio I/O library in Rust

RustApache-2.0★ 3,980 stars⑂ 559 forkssince Dec 2014View on GitHub ↗

RustAudio/cpal holds a health index of 92 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (96/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (61/100). It was last updated today. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

92
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

92
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 78 is calibrated to 92 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

RustAudioOrganization
1,011 followers42 public repossince Nov 2014

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.iocpal0.18.22,863,1668063 days agoaudiosoundplaybackrecordingcross-platform
crates.ioasio-sys0.4.027,0651063 days agoaudiosoundwindowsasiosteinbergexternal-ffi-bindings

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

96Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
29.8/36Commit cadence — 43/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 451 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 15 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year451
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year43

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 90 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 63 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~24.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count90
latest_release_tagv0.18.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release63
mean_days_between_releases24.9
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?

90Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
58.4/60Stars — 3,980 stars
22.9/25Forks — 559 forks
7.9/15Watchers — 27 watchers
Inputs used
forks559
stars3,980
watchers27
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 2,890,231 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagescpal, asio-sys
dependents—
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads25,622,044
monthly_downloads2,890,231
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?

79Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor — 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
16/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 29% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 99 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 34 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled99
top_contributor_share0.29
How it's scored
36.9/42Issue resolution — 88% of issues closed
24.6/30PR acceptance — 640/780 decided PRs merged
4.3/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/3 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 5/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs640
open_issues69
closed_issues503
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d4
prs_merged_30d10
prs_decided_30d15
issue_closed_ratio0.879
closed_unmerged_prs140
first_time_authors_30d3
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d3
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
21.6/25Owner reach — 1,011 followers of RustAudio
23.9/25Track record — 42 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,011
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginRustAudio
public_repos42
account_age_days4,342

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 2 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 63 days ago
20/20Version history — 80 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagescpal, asio-sys
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish63

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

66Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — rustfmt.toml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://docs.rs/cpal
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 3 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsrust, audio, sound
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/cpal
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

61Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5Code-Review — Found 5/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 34 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 15 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 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): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

61Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 98 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.98
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — Cargo.toml, asio-sys/Cargo.toml, examples/android/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — rustfmt.toml
11/11Static type checking — Rust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile
4/10Demonstrated agent practice — 2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
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_testsno
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.02
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, asio-sys/Cargo.toml, examples/android/Cargo.toml, examples/audioworklet/Cargo.toml, examples/ios-feedback/Cargo.toml, examples/webaudio/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
53.8/55Manageable file sizes — 2/91 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes72,187
source_files_sampled91
oversized_source_files2
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 — examples
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

3,980GitHub stars
99contributors
451commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
90releases
3bus factor
69open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 559 ⇿
0Stars
559Forks
90Releases

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.

010020030040050060051282015-012020-112026-10
Major 0Minor 18Patch 62

Each point covers 11 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 · 2026-10-19 16:37 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 5/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
10Contributorsproject has 34 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 15 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iodasp_sample0.11Cargo.toml
crates.ionum-derive0.4asio-sys/Cargo.toml
crates.ionum-traits0.2asio-sys/Cargo.toml
All dependencies 44

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 41 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.iodasp_sample—direct
crates.ionum-derive—direct
crates.ionum-traits—direct
crates.ioalsa—indirect
crates.ioalsa-sys—indirect
crates.ioanyhow—indirect
crates.ioasio-sys—indirect
crates.ioaudio_thread_priority—indirect
crates.iobindgen—indirect
crates.ioblock2—indirect
crates.iocc—indirect
crates.ioclap—indirect
crates.ioconsole_error_panic_hook—indirect
crates.iocoreaudio-rs—indirect
crates.iofutures-channel—indirect
crates.iofutures-executor—indirect
crates.iofutures-util—indirect
crates.iogloo—indirect
crates.iohound—indirect
crates.iojack—indirect
crates.iojni—indirect
crates.iojs-sys—indirect
crates.iolibc—indirect
crates.iomach2—indirect
crates.iondk—indirect
crates.iondk-context—indirect
crates.iondk-glue—indirect
crates.ioobjc2—indirect
crates.ioobjc2-audio-toolbox—indirect
crates.ioobjc2-avf-audio—indirect
crates.ioobjc2-core-audio—indirect
crates.ioobjc2-core-audio-types—indirect
crates.ioobjc2-core-foundation—indirect
crates.ioobjc2-foundation—indirect
crates.iopipewire—indirect
crates.ioportable-atomic—indirect
crates.iopulseaudio—indirect
crates.ioringbuf—indirect
crates.iowalkdir—indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen—indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-futures—indirect
crates.ioweb-sys—indirect
crates.iowindows—indirect
crates.iowindows-core—indirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

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 — crates.io.