Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-18 00:12 UTC

Serial-ATA / lofty-rs

Audio metadata library

RustApache-2.0★ 359 stars⑂ 76 forkssince Apr 2021View on GitHub ↗

Serial-ATA/lofty-rs holds a health index of 89 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (88/100) and lowest on Security (60/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

89
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.

89
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 75 is calibrated to 89 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

AlexPersonal account
27 followers54 public repossince Aug 2020@stjude

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.iolofty0.25.2126,136594 days agoaudioid3metadatatagsvorbismultimediaparser-implementations
crates.ioogg_pager0.7.2152,94018125 days agooggxiphparser-implementationsmultimedia
crates.iolofty_attr0.13.0124,7922239 days ago—

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

88Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 4 days ago
20.8/36Commit cadence — 30/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 122 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 12 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year122
human_commit_share0.96
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year30
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 34 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 4 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~64.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count34
latest_release_tag0.25.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release4
mean_days_between_releases64.6
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?

72Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
41.4/60Stars — 359 stars
15.6/25Forks — 76 forks
2.7/15Watchers — 4 watchers
Inputs used
forks76
stars359
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges6
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
74.7/80Monthly downloads — 403,868 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageslofty, ogg_pager, lofty_attr
dependents—
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads3,663,300
monthly_downloads403,868
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?

65Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 87% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 41 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 11 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled41
top_contributor_share0.867
How it's scored
38.5/42Issue resolution — 92% of issues closed
27.4/30PR acceptance — 409/447 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 2/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 7/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs409
open_issues20
closed_issues218
prs_merged_7d3
prs_decided_7d3
prs_merged_30d9
prs_decided_30d9
issue_closed_ratio0.916
closed_unmerged_prs38
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d2
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
10.4/25Owner reach — 27 followers of Serial-ATA
24.7/25Track record — 54 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers27
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginSerial-ATA
public_repos54
account_age_days2,223
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 3 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 4 days ago
20/20Version history — 59 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageslofty, ogg_pager, lofty_attr
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish4

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

88Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — Cargo.toml ([workspace.lints]), lofty/Cargo.toml ([lints]), lofty_attr/Cargo.toml ([lints]), ogg_pager/Cargo.toml ([lints]), rustfmt.toml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 25 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://docs.rs/lofty
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 20 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsaudio, rust, tagging, id3v1, id3v2, riff, apev2, mp3, mp4, ogg, vorbis, flac, aiff, wav, opus, hacktoberfest, aac, adts, speex, wavpack
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/lofty
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

60Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2/2.5CI-Tests — 25 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5Code-Review — Found 7/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 11 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
5/5Fuzzing — project is fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 12 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
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
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
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, 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.

76Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
20/40Legible commit history — 36 of 96 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.375
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes346
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — Cargo.toml, examples/custom_resolver/Cargo.toml, fuzz/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — Cargo.toml ([workspace.lints]), lofty/Cargo.toml ([lints]), lofty_attr/Cargo.toml ([lints]), ogg_pager/Cargo.toml ([lints]), rustfmt.toml
11/11Static type checking — Rust (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 4 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
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, examples/custom_resolver/Cargo.toml, fuzz/Cargo.toml, lofty/Cargo.toml, lofty_attr/Cargo.toml, ogg_pager/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.04
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/278 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes46,625
source_files_sampled278
oversized_source_files0
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

359GitHub stars
41contributors
122commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
34releases
1bus factor
20open 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 ★ / 76 ⇿
0Stars
76Forks
33Releases

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.

0204060807642021-122024-042026-09
Major 0Minor 17Patch 16

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.0 / 10
6.0aggregate

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 · 2026-09-18 00:11 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
8CI-Tests25 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 7/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 11 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 12 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
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 12
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iodata-encoding2.10.0lofty/Cargo.toml
crates.iobyteorder—lofty/Cargo.toml
crates.ioflate21.1.9lofty/Cargo.toml
crates.iolofty_attr—lofty/Cargo.toml
crates.iolog0.4.29lofty/Cargo.toml
crates.ioogg_pager—lofty/Cargo.toml
crates.iopaste1.0.15lofty/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1.0lofty/Cargo.toml
crates.iosyn3.0.3lofty_attr/Cargo.toml
crates.ioquote1.0.36lofty_attr/Cargo.toml
crates.ioproc-macro21.0.86lofty_attr/Cargo.toml
crates.iobyteorder—ogg_pager/Cargo.toml
All dependencies 16

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 8 direct and 8 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.iodata-encoding—direct
crates.ioflate2—direct
crates.iolog—direct
crates.iopaste—direct
crates.ioproc-macro2—direct
crates.ioquote—direct
crates.ioserde—direct
crates.iosyn—direct
crates.ioenv_logger—indirect
crates.iogungraun—indirect
crates.iolibfuzzer-sys—indirect
crates.ioregex—indirect
crates.iorusty-fork—indirect
crates.iostructopt—indirect
crates.iotempfile—indirect
crates.iotest-log—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.