Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-04 18:28 UTC

aio-libs / aiosignal

aiosignal: a list of registered asynchronous callbacks

Python · Shell · MakefileApache-2.0★ 165 stars⑂ 20 forkssince Aug 2019View on GitHub ↗

aio-libs/aiosignal holds a health index of 88 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (96/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (49/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

88
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.

88
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 74 is calibrated to 88 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

aio-libsOrganization
1,200 followers68 public repossince Mar 2014

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIaiosignal1.4.0-10396 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

49Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 1 days ago
1.7/36Commit cadence33/52 weeks with commits, discounted for automation: 3 of the last 100 commits human-authored, spanning 141 days
1.3/18Commit volume99 commits in the last year, discounted for automation: 3 of the last 100 commits human-authored, spanning 141 days
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year99
human_commit_share0.03
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year33
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases9 releases published
7.2/36Release recencylatest release 396 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~267 days
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases1 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 1 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count9
latest_release_tagv1.4.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release396
mean_days_between_releases267

Community & Adoption

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

74Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
35.9/60Stars165 stars
10.7/25Forks20 forks
4.7/15Watchers8 watchers
Inputs used
forks20
stars165
watchers8
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

100Exceptional
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
7.2/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges5
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesbadge.fury.io, codecov.io, github.com, readthedocs.org, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

82Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
14.4/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 36% of commits
12.2/13.5Contributor breadth9 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 39 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled9
top_contributor_share0.361
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
25.5/30PR acceptance725/852 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewno data
Inputs used
merged_prs725
open_issues0
closed_issues11
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs127
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.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
22.1/25Owner reach1,200 followers of aio-libs
25/25Track record68 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,200
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginaio-libs
public_repos68
account_age_days4,516
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
14/35Publish recencylatest publish 396 days ago
20/20Version history10 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesaiosignal
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish396

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

96Exceptional · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

100Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configtox.ini
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://aiosignal.aio-libs.org
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspython, asyncio, signals
has_wikino
homepagehttps://aiosignal.aio-libs.org
docs_sitehttps://aiosignal.aio-libs.org
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

77Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Reviewno data
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 39 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
1/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
5/5SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0.8/7.5Signed-Releases1 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 1 signed artifacts.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate7.1
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 advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages1
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:aiosignal@1.4.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 1 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.

49Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno 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.
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile, docs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configtox.ini
11/11Static type checking.mypy.ini, aiosignal/py.typed
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance97 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile, docs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs.mypy.ini, aiosignal/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.97
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codePython with type-check config (.mypy.ini, aiosignal/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/6 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes11,010
source_files_sampled6
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

165GitHub stars
9contributors
99commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
9releases
2bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 20 ⇿
0Stars
20Forks
7Releases

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.

0481216202022020-072023-062026-04
Major 0Minor 3Patch 3

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.1 / 10
7.1aggregate

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 · 2026-08-04 18:28 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 39 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous 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
2Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
1Signed-Releases1 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 1 signed artifacts.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIfrozenlist>= 1.1.0setup.cfg
PyPItyping-extensions>= 4.4setup.cfg
All dependencies 16

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 16 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaiohttp-theme0.1.7indirect
PyPIcherry-picker2.6.0indirect
PyPIcoverage7.15.2indirect
PyPImypy2.3.0indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.6.1indirect
PyPIpygmentsindirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio1.4.0indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIsetuptools-git1.2indirect
PyPIsphinx8.2.3indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-spelling8.0.2indirect
PyPItowncrier25.8.0indirect
PyPItox4.58.0indirect
PyPItwine7.0.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:aiosignal@1.4.0 pulls in 1 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.

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsPyPI.