Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-16 06:59 UTC

SAP / pylint-per-file-ignores

A pylint plugin to ignore error codes per file.

PythonMIT★ 5 stars⑂ 4 forkssince Aug 2025forkView on GitHub ↗
KindPluginLibraryhow this is determined

SAP/pylint-per-file-ignores holds a health index of 69 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (82/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (39/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

69
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.

69
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 62 is calibrated to 69 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

SAPOrganization · verified domain
4,529 followers276 public repossince Oct 2012

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIpylint-per-file-ignores3.2.1703,56916165 days agopylintpluginqualitylinter

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

63Moderate · 21% of overall

Development activity

51Moderate
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
3.2/36Commit cadence — 46/52 weeks with commits, discounted for automation: 4 of the last 100 commits human-authored, spanning 104 days
1.8/18Commit volume — 269 commits in the last year, discounted for automation: 4 of the last 100 commits human-authored, spanning 104 days
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year269
human_commit_share0.04
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year46

Release discipline

81Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 7 releases published
27/36Release recency — latest release 165 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~36.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count7
latest_release_tagv3.2.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release165
mean_days_between_releases36.6

Community & Adoption

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

39Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

14Critical
How it's scored
9.8/60Stars — 5 stars
4/25Forks — 4 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks4
stars5
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

25At Risk
How it's scored
0/22.5README
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_readmeno
has_licenseno
readme_badges1
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicescoveralls.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

98Exceptional
How it's scored
78/80Monthly downloads — 703,569 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagespylint-per-file-ignores
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads703,569
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?

82Excellent · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

42Weak
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
9.8/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 56% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 11 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled11
top_contributor_share0.565

Issue & PR responsiveness

99Exceptional
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
29.1/30PR acceptance — 281/290 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — no data
Inputs used
merged_prs281
open_issues0
closed_issues10
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs9
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, OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 4,529 followers of SAP
25/25Track record — 276 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers4,529
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginSAP
public_repos276
account_age_days5,088

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 165 days ago
20/20Version history — 16 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespylint-per-file-ignores
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish165

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

57Moderate · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

94Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .flake8, .pylintrc, pyproject.toml ([tool.pylint], [tool.isort])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.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_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

1Critical
How it's scored
0/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeno
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionno

Security

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

66Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

58Moderate
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
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — no data
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — 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 0 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
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Code-Review. 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_packages8
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:pylint-per-file-ignores@3.2.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 8 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

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

62Moderate
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .flake8, .pylintrc, pyproject.toml ([tool.pylint], [tool.isort])
11/11Static type checking — pylint_per_file_ignores/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 96 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configspylint_per_file_ignores/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.96

Code legibility for models

82Excellent
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (pylint_per_file_ignores/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/21 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes4,253
source_files_sampled21
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

5GitHub stars
11contributors
269commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
7releases
1bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Community profile unavailable
  • pypi download statistics for 'pylint-per-file-ignores' unavailable this scan (stats endpoint failed after retries); adoption may be under-evidenced
  • pypi download figures for pylint-per-file-ignores carried forward from the previous scan (stats endpoint unavailable this scan)

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 4 ⇿
0Stars
4Forks
4Releases

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.

1223344412025-092025-122026-04
Major 1Minor 2Patch 1
OpenSSF Scorecard 5.8 / 10
5.8aggregate

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 · 2026-09-16 06:58 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
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
n/aCode-ReviewFound no human activity in the last 30 changesets
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
0Dangerous-Workflowdangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 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
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIpylint>=3.3,<5pyproject.toml
All dependencies 61

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 60 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIpylint4.0.8direct
PyPIast-serialize0.11.2indirect
PyPIastroid4.0.4indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIblack26.5.1indirect
PyPIcfgv3.5.0indirect
PyPIchardet7.6.0indirect
PyPIclick8.5.0indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverage7.16.0indirect
PyPIdependency-groups1.3.2indirect
PyPIdiff-cover10.5.1indirect
PyPIdill0.4.1indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.3indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIfilelock3.32.6indirect
PyPIflake87.3.0indirect
PyPIflake8-bugbear26.9.9indirect
PyPIflake8-builtins3.1.0indirect
PyPIflake8-comprehensions3.17.0indirect
PyPIflake8-plugin-utils1.3.3indirect
PyPIflake8-pytest-style2.2.0indirect
PyPIflake8-simplify0.30.0indirect
PyPIflake8-tergeo26.9.10.0indirect
PyPIflake8-typing-imports1.17.0indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.19indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIisort9.0.1indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIlibrt0.15.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImccabe0.7.0indirect
PyPImypy2.3.1indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPInodeenv1.10.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.3indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.11.8indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.6.2indirect
PyPIpycodestyle2.14.0indirect
PyPIpyflakes3.4.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.21.0indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpytest-datadir1.8.0indirect
PyPIpytest-fixture-classes1.0.4indirect
PyPIpytest-randomly5.0.0indirect
PyPIpython-discovery1.6.0indirect
PyPIpytokens0.4.1indirect
PyPIpyupgrade3.21.2indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPItokenize-rt6.2.0indirect
PyPItoml-sort0.24.4indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItomlkit0.15.1indirect
PyPItowncrier26.9.0indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPIuv0.12.13indirect
PyPIvirtualenv21.7.9indirect
PyPIyesqa1.5.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:pylint-per-file-ignores@3.2.1 pulls in 8 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 SAP/pylint-per-file-ignores. Read them side by side →

99astral-sh/ruffAn extremely fast Python linter and code formatter, written in Rust.Exceptional94stbenjam/skillsawKeep your skills sharp. Intelligence for agent context.Exceptional93rohaquinlop/complexipyBlazingly fast cognitive complexity analysis for Python, written in Rust.Exceptional92prospector-dev/prospectorInspects Python source files and provides information about type and location of classes, methods etcExcellent94hardisgroupcom/sfdx-hardisFrench-army-knife Toolbox for Salesforce. Orchestrates base commands and assist users with interactive wizards to make much more than native Salesforce CLI + Allows you to define a complete CI/CD Pipeline and Schedule a daily Metadata backup & monitoring of your orgs + AI-enhanced org DocumentationExceptional92qltysh/qlty💎 Code quality CLI for universal linting, auto-formatting, security scanning, and maintainabilityExcellent

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.