Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-05 23:05 UTC

VanL / simplebroker

A lightweight, no-configuration message broker/queue for cli tools

PythonMIT★ 1 star⑂ 0 forkssince Jul 2025View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

VanL/simplebroker holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (90/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (42/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

86
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.

86
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 72 is calibrated to 86 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

VanLPersonal account
135 followers94 public repossince Mar 2010@modelmonster, @ospoco

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
PyPIsimplebroker8.1.013,7331032 days agobrokerclimessage-queuequeuesqlite

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

90Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

84Excellent
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 2 days ago
20.1/36Commit cadence — 29/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 913 commits in the last year
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_year913
human_commit_share0.95
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year29

Release discipline

98Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 2 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~0.9 days
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — 5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv8.1.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release2
mean_days_between_releases0.9

Community & Adoption

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

42Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

1Critical
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 1 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars1
watchers0
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 (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesbadge.fury.io, codecov.io, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

69Good
How it's scored
55.2/80Monthly downloads — 13,733 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagessimplebroker
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads13,733
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?

56Moderate · 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

63Moderate
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
28.5/30PR acceptance — 74/78 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs74
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs4
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

63Moderate
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
15.3/25Owner reach — 135 followers of VanL
25/25Track record — 94 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers135
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginVanL
public_repos94
account_age_days6,030
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 2 days ago
20/20Version history — 103 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagessimplebroker
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish2

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

86Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

84Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 11 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 1 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://github.com/VanL/simplebroker#readme
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://github.com/VanL/simplebroker#readme
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

86Excellent · 16% of overall

Security posture

83Excellent
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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 1 out of 1 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 — Found 0/28 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
5/5Fuzzing — project is 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
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
6/7.5Signed-Releases — 5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate8.3

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages40
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 40 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

84Excellent · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

93Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt present
32.6/40Legible commit history — 58 of 95 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.611
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes10,400

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

72Good
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checking — extensions/simplebroker_pg/simplebroker_pg/py.typed, extensions/simplebroker_redis/simplebroker_redis/py.typed, simplebroker/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
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
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsextensions/simplebroker_pg/simplebroker_pg/py.typed, extensions/simplebroker_redis/simplebroker_redis/py.typed, simplebroker/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.04

Code legibility for models

80Excellent
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (extensions/simplebroker_pg/simplebroker_pg/py.typed, extensions/simplebroker_redis/simplebroker_redis/py.typed, simplebroker/py.typed)
53.3/55Manageable file sizes — 11/351 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes155,450
source_files_sampled351
oversized_source_files11

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 — 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

1GitHub stars
1contributors
913commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 8.3 / 10
8.3aggregate

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 · 2026-09-05 23:05 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests1 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/28 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
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
8Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 40

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 40 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaiosqlite0.22.1indirect
PyPIaiosqlitepool1.0.0indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.8.0indirect
PyPIasync-timeout5.0.1indirect
PyPIatheris3.0.0indirect
PyPIatheris3.1.0indirect
PyPIbuild1.5.0indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverage7.15.4indirect
PyPIexecnet2.1.2indirect
PyPIhatchling1.32.0indirect
PyPIhypothesis6.165.10indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIlibrt0.15.0indirect
PyPImypy2.3.1indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIpackaging26.3indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpsycopg3.3.4indirect
PyPIpsycopg-binary3.3.4indirect
PyPIpsycopg-pool3.3.1indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpyproject-hooks1.2.0indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpytest-timeout2.4.0indirect
PyPIpytest-xdist3.8.0indirect
PyPIredis8.1.0indirect
PyPIruff0.16.3indirect
PyPIsimplebroker8.1.0indirect
PyPIsimplebroker-pg4.1.0indirect
PyPIsimplebroker-redis4.1.0indirect
PyPIsortedcontainers2.4.0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItomlkit0.15.1indirect
PyPItrove-classifiers2026.6.1.19indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPItzdata2026.3indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 40 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

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 VanL/simplebroker. Read them side by side →

98svix/svix-webhooksThe open source and enterprise-ready webhooks service 🦀Exceptional97diesel-rs/dieselA safe, extensible ORM and Query Builder for RustExceptional96emqx/emqxThe most scalable and reliable MQTT broker for AI, IoT, IIoT and connected vehiclesExceptional95open-mercato/open-mercatoThe AI-Engineering Foundation Framework for business apps: open-source TypeScript, with multi-tenancy, RBAC, events and domain modules already decided as conventions and specs, so Cursor, Claude Code and Codex build features instead of re-deciding architecture. Start with 80% done.Exceptional100aws/aws-sam-cliCLI tool to build, test, debug, and deploy Serverless applications using AWS SAMExceptional99apache/supersetApache Superset is a Data Visualization and Data Exploration PlatformExceptional

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.