Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-19 08:12 UTC

TWiStErRob / net.twisterrob.gradle

Quality plugin for Gradle that supports Android flavors

KotlinUnlicense★ 22 stars⑂ 4 forkssince Jan 2018View on GitHub ↗
KindPluginhow this is determined
#android#gradle#gradle-plugin#reporting#static-analysis#testing

TWiStErRob/net.twisterrob.gradle holds a health index of 69 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (83/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (45/100). It was last updated 10 days ago. 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

Róbert PappPersonal account
381 followers108 public repossince Nov 2012Marks and Spencer

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

83Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

82Excellent
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 10 days ago
25.6/36Commit cadence — 37/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 111 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 27 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year111
human_commit_share0.15
days_since_last_push10
active_weeks_last_year37

Release discipline

84Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 67 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 29 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~192.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count67
latest_release_tagv0.20
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release29
mean_days_between_releases192.8
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?

46Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

25At Risk
How it's scored
21.4/60Stars — 22 stars
4/25Forks — 4 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks4
stars22
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

70Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Unlicense)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges5
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

45Weak · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

16Critical
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1

Issue & PR responsiveness

57Moderate
How it's scored
23.1/42Issue resolution — 55% of issues closed
26.8/30PR acceptance — 827/926 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs827
open_issues83
closed_issues101
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d3
prs_decided_30d3
issue_closed_ratio0.549
closed_unmerged_prs99
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.

Ownership & stewardship

67Good
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
18.6/25Owner reach — 381 followers of TWiStErRob
25/25Track record — 108 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers381
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginTWiStErRob
public_repos108
account_age_days5,073
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

66Good
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 29 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
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 site — https://github.com/TWiStErRob/net.twisterrob.gradle#features
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsandroid, gradle, gradle-plugin, reporting, static-analysis, testing
has_wikino
homepagehttps://github.com/TWiStErRob/net.twisterrob.gradle#features
docs_sitehttps://github.com/TWiStErRob/net.twisterrob.gradle#features
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

61Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

61Moderate
How it's scored
0/7.5Binary-Artifacts — binaries present in source code
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 29 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
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 — 27 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
4.5/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
6.8/7.5Token-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_aggregate6.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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.

53Moderate · 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)

56Moderate
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — browser/agp-810x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-811x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-812x/build.gradle.kts (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Kotlin (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
2/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 85 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_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifestsbrowser/agp-810x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-811x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-812x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-813x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-81x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-82x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-83x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-84x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-85x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-86x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-87x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-88x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-89x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-90x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-91x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-92x/build.gradle.kts, browser/agp-93x/build.gradle.kts, browser/checkstyle/build.gradle.kts, browser/kotlin-18x/build.gradle.kts, browser/kotlin-19x/build.gradle.kts, browser/kotlin-20x/build.gradle.kts, browser/kotlin-21x/build.gradle.kts, browser/kotlin-22x/build.gradle.kts, browser/lint/build.gradle.kts, browser/pmd/build.gradle.kts, build.gradle.kts, checkers/checkstyle/build.gradle.kts, checkers/pmd/build.gradle.kts, common/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-810x/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-811x/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-812x/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-813x/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-81x/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-82x/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-83x/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-84x/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-85x/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-86x/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-87x/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-88x/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-89x/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-90x/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-91x/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-92x/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-93x/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp-base/build.gradle.kts, compat/agp/build.gradle.kts, compat/build.gradle.kts, compat/gradle/build.gradle.kts, compat/kotlin-base/build.gradle.kts, docs/debug/agp81-gradle81/build.gradle.kts, docs/debug/agp82-gradle82/build.gradle.kts, docs/debug/agp83-gradle84/build.gradle.kts, docs/debug/agp84-gradle86/build.gradle.kts, docs/examples/local/build.gradle.kts, docs/examples/release/build.gradle.kts, docs/examples/snapshot/build.gradle.kts, gradle/plugins/build.gradle.kts, graph/build.gradle.kts, graph/buildSrc/build.gradle.kts, graph/sample/app/build.gradle, graph/sample/build.gradle, graph/sample/lib/build.gradle, plugin/base/build.gradle.kts, plugin/base/src/testFixtures/resources/net/twisterrob/gradle/test/android-plugin_app/build.gradle, plugin/base/src/testFixtures/resources/net/twisterrob/gradle/test/kotlin-plugin_app/build.gradle, plugin/build.gradle.kts, plugin/building/build.gradle.kts, plugin/languages/build.gradle.kts, plugin/release/build.gradle.kts, plugin/reporting/build.gradle.kts, plugin/settings/build.gradle.kts, plugin/signing/build.gradle.kts, plugin/versioning/build.gradle.kts, quality/build.gradle.kts, test/build.gradle.kts, test/integration/build.gradle.kts, test/internal/build.gradle.kts, test/internal/runtime/build.gradle.kts, test/src/test/resources/android-all_kinds/app/build.gradle, test/src/test/resources/android-all_kinds/build.gradle, test/src/test/resources/android-all_kinds/dynamic_feature/build.gradle, test/src/test/resources/android-all_kinds/library/build.gradle, test/src/test/resources/android-all_kinds/library/nested/build.gradle, test/src/test/resources/android-all_kinds/test/build.gradle, test/src/test/resources/android-multi_module/build.gradle, test/src/test/resources/android-root_app/build.gradle, test/src/test/resources/android-single_module/build.gradle, test/src/test/resources/android-single_module/module/build.gradle, test/src/test/resources/jvm-root_app/build.gradle
dependency_bot_commit_share0.85

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Kotlin (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/303 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageKotlin
largest_source_bytes29,701
source_files_sampled303
oversized_source_files0

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
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 — demos, examples, sample
Inputs used
example_dirsdemos, examples, sample
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

22GitHub stars
1contributors
111commits, last 12 months
10days since last push
67releases
1bus factor
83open 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 ★ / 4 ⇿
0Stars
4Forks
49Releases

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.

1223344412022-082023-082024-07
Major 0Minor 0Patch 1

Each point covers 2 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 08:11 UTC

0Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
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
9CI-Tests29 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/26 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
10Maintained27 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
9SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 0

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 0 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies to assess

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 TWiStErRob/net.twisterrob.gradle. Read them side by side →

95detekt/detektStatic code analysis for KotlinExceptional95soot-oss/SootUpA new version of Soot with a completely overhauled architectureExceptional94react/react-nativeA framework for building native applications using ReactExceptional94graalvm/native-build-toolsNative-image plugins for various build toolsExceptional98appium/appiumCross-platform automation framework for all kinds of apps, built on top of the W3C WebDriver protocolExceptional98microsoft/react-native-test-appreact-native-test-app provides an app for all supported platforms as a packageExceptional

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.