Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-21 15:06 UTC

Shopify / semian

:monkey: Resiliency toolkit for Ruby for failing fast

RubyMIT★ 1,490 stars⑂ 90 forkssince Sep 2014View on GitHub ↗

Shopify/semian holds a health index of 90 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (89/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (61/100). It was last updated 11 days ago. 7 contributors account for most of its recent work.

90
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.

90
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 76 is calibrated to 90 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

ShopifyOrganization · verified domain
8,708 followers1,236 public repossince Apr 2008

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemssemian0.28.4-10044 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

69Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 11 days ago
13.8/36Commit cadence — 20/52 weeks with commits
15.9/18Commit volume — 58 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 13 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year58
human_commit_share0.73
days_since_last_push11
active_weeks_last_year20
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 39 releases published
16.2/36Release recency — latest release 253 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~19.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count39
latest_release_tagv0.27.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release253
mean_days_between_releases19.9

Community & Adoption

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

78Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
51.5/60Stars — 1,490 stars
16.2/25Forks — 90 forks
14.6/15Watchers — 425 watchers
Inputs used
forks90
stars1,490
watchers425
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges1
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
72.6/80Total downloads — 9,753,687 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagessemian
dependents—
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads9,753,687
monthly_downloads—
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?

89Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
51.3/54Bus factor — 7 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
19.1/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 15% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 96 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 32 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor7
contributors_sampled96
top_contributor_share0.151
How it's scored
25.1/42Issue resolution — 60% of issues closed
16.7/30PR acceptance — 505/909 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
13.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 10/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
merged_prs505
open_issues35
closed_issues52
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.598
closed_unmerged_prs404
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
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 8,708 followers of Shopify
25/25Track record — 1,236 public repos, account ~18 yr old
Inputs used
followers8,708
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginShopify
public_repos1,236
account_age_days6,756

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 44 days ago
20/20Version history — 100 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagessemian
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish44

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 16 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://github.com/Shopify/semian
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsresiliency, circuit-breaker, bulkheads, ruby, webscale
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://github.com/Shopify/semian
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
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-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 16 out of 16 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
6.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 10/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 32 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 — 13 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
2.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
4.5/5Security-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
4.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 4 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
14/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: concurrent-ruby 1.3.5 (high 7.5)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
33.7/40No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 123 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories4
affected_packages2
assessed_packages78
unassessed_packages1
affected_by_severityhigh 2
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 78 resolved dependencies against OSV. 1 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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.

61Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.docker.com/llms.txt)
30.7/40Legible commit history — 42 of 73 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://docs.docker.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.575
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — devcontainer, Dockerfile, lockfile
4/10Demonstrated agent practice — 2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 21 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.02
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.21
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Ruby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/123 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes33,728
source_files_sampled123
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

1,490GitHub stars
96contributors
58commits, last 12 months
11days since last push
39releases
7bus factor
35open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 90 ⇿
0Stars
90Forks
39Releases

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.

0204060801008542014-102020-102026-10
Major 0Minor 14Patch 23

Each point covers 11 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.3 / 10
6.3aggregate

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 · 2026-10-21 15:05 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-Tests16 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
9Code-ReviewFound 10/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
10Contributorsproject has 32 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained13 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
9Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6Vulnerabilities4 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 11
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsrake—Gemfile
RubyGemsrake-compiler—Gemfile
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby—Gemfile
RubyGemsrubocop-minitest—Gemfile
RubyGemsrubocop-rake—Gemfile
RubyGemsrubocop~> 1.81Gemfile
RubyGemsrubocop-shopify~> 2Gemfile
RubyGemsrubocop-thread_safety—Gemfile
RubyGemsgruff~> 0.23experiments/Gemfile
RubyGemslogger—experiments/Gemfile
RubyGemscsv—experiments/Gemfile
All dependencies 79

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 13 direct and 66 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby—direct
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.5direct
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.8direct
RubyGemscsv3.3.5direct
RubyGemsgruff0.29.0direct
RubyGemslogger1.7.0direct
RubyGemsrake13.3.1direct
RubyGemsrake-compiler1.3.0direct
RubyGemsrubocop1.81.7direct
RubyGemsrubocop-minitest0.38.2direct
RubyGemsrubocop-rake0.7.1direct
RubyGemsrubocop-shopify2.18.0direct
RubyGemsrubocop-thread_safety0.7.3direct
RubyGemsactivemodel8.1.3.1indirect
RubyGemsactiverecord8.1.3.1indirect
RubyGemsactivesupport8.1.3.1indirect
RubyGemsast2.4.3indirect
RubyGemsbase640.3.0indirect
RubyGemsbenchmark-ips2.14.0indirect
RubyGemsbenchmark-memory0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal3.3.0indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal4.1.2indirect
RubyGemsbyebug12.0.0indirect
RubyGemscoderay1.1.3indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool3.0.2indirect
RubyGemsdate3.4.1indirect
RubyGemsdebug1.11.0indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.3indirect
RubyGemserb5.0.1indirect
RubyGemsgoogle-protobuf4.33.0indirect
RubyGemsgoogleapis-common-protos-types1.22.0indirect
RubyGemsgrpc1.76.0indirect
RubyGemshiredis0.6.3indirect
RubyGemshiredis-client0.26.1indirect
RubyGemshistogram0.2.4.1indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.15.2indirect
RubyGemsio-console0.8.0indirect
RubyGemsirb1.15.2indirect
RubyGemsjson2.21.2indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.5indirect
RubyGemslint_roller1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsmemory_profiler1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsmethod_source1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsminitest5.26.2indirect
RubyGemsmocha2.8.0indirect
RubyGemsmutex_m0.3.0indirect
RubyGemsmysql20.5.7indirect
RubyGemsobserver0.1.2indirect
RubyGemsparallel1.27.0indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.10.0indirect
RubyGemspg1.6.2indirect
RubyGemspkg-config1.6.4indirect
RubyGemspp0.6.2indirect
RubyGemsprettyprint0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsprism1.6.0indirect
RubyGemspry0.15.2indirect
RubyGemspry-byebug3.11.0indirect
RubyGemspsych5.2.6indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrdoc6.14.1indirect
RubyGemsredis5.4.1indirect
RubyGemsredis-client0.26.1indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.11.3indirect
RubyGemsreline0.6.1indirect
RubyGemsrmagick6.1.4indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.47.1indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemsruby2_keywords0.0.5indirect
RubyGemssecurerandom0.4.1indirect
RubyGemsstringio3.1.7indirect
RubyGemstimeout0.6.1indirect
RubyGemstoxiproxy2.0.2indirect
RubyGemstrilogy2.9.0indirect
RubyGemstzinfo2.0.6indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-emoji4.1.0indirect
RubyGemsuri1.1.1indirect
RubyGemswebrick1.9.1indirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 78 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct. 1 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
concurrent-ruby1.3.5directhigh31.3.7
erb5.0.1indirecthigh16.0.4

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 statistics — RubyGems.