Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 05:10 UTC

anttiharju / compare-changes

For use with find-changes-action

RustMIT★ 1 star⑂ 0 forkssince Nov 2025View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

anttiharju/compare-changes holds a health index of 73 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (86/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (32/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

73
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.

73
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 64 is calibrated to 73 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Antti HarjuPersonal account
16 followers32 public repossince Mar 2020

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.iocompare-changes0.9.12,025910 days agofiltergithub-actionsglobpathpattern-matchingcommand-line-utilitiesparser-implementations

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

83Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
13.8/36Commit cadence20/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume1,030 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 12 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year1,030
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year20
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases100 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~9.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv0.9.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases9.2

Community & Adoption

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

32At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars1 stars
0/25Forks0 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars1
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
44.1/80Monthly downloads2,025 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagescompare-changes
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads9,653
monthly_downloads2,025
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?

57Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2.5/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 89% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth4 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.889
How it's scored
37.2/42Issue resolution89% of issues closed
28.3/30PR acceptance164/174 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs164
open_issues5
closed_issues39
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.886
closed_unmerged_prs10
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
8.8/25Owner reach16 followers of anttiharju
23.1/25Track record32 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers16
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginanttiharju
public_repos32
account_age_days2,326
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history91 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagescompare-changes
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

86Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows16 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests7 out of 7 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

Documentation

80Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttp://anttiharju.dev/compare-changes/
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikino
homepagehttp://anttiharju.dev/compare-changes/
docs_sitehttp://anttiharju.dev/compare-changes/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

62Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests7 out of 7 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-ReviewFound 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
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 12 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
5/5SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate6.2

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
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.rubocop.yml
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentNix, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
5/8Automated maintenancedependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixyes
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/13 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes15,025
source_files_sampled13
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

1GitHub stars
4contributors
1,030commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
5open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.2 / 10
6.2aggregate

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 · 2026-07-17 05:10 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests7 out of 7 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 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 12 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
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 7
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.ioanstyle1.0Cargo.toml
crates.iochumsky0.13Cargo.toml
crates.ioclap4.6Cargo.toml
crates.ioregex1.13Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde-saphyr0.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1.0Cargo.toml
crates.iotempfile3.27Cargo.toml
All dependencies 91

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 84 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioanstyle1.0.14direct
crates.iochumsky0.13.0direct
crates.ioclap4.6.2direct
crates.ioregex1.13.1direct
crates.ioserde-saphyr0.0.29direct
crates.ioserde_json1.0.150direct
crates.iotempfile3.27.0direct
crates.ioahash0.8.12indirect
crates.ioaho-corasick1.1.4indirect
crates.ioallocator-api20.2.21indirect
crates.ioannotate-snippets0.12.16indirect
crates.ioanstream1.0.0indirect
crates.ioanstyle-parse1.0.0indirect
crates.ioanstyle-query1.1.5indirect
crates.ioanstyle-wincon3.0.11indirect
crates.ioar_archive_writer0.5.2indirect
crates.ioarraydeque0.5.1indirect
crates.ioassert_cmd2.2.2indirect
crates.ioautocfg1.5.1indirect
crates.iobase640.22.1indirect
crates.iobitflags2.13.1indirect
crates.iobstr1.13.0indirect
crates.iobumpalo3.20.3indirect
crates.iocc1.2.67indirect
crates.iocfg-if1.0.4indirect
crates.ioclap_builder4.6.2indirect
crates.ioclap_derive4.6.1indirect
crates.ioclap_lex1.1.0indirect
crates.iocolorchoice1.0.5indirect
crates.iodifflib0.4.0indirect
crates.ioencoding_rs0.8.35indirect
crates.ioencoding_rs_io0.1.7indirect
crates.ioequivalent1.0.2indirect
crates.ioerrno0.3.14indirect
crates.iofastrand2.4.1indirect
crates.iofind-msvc-tools0.1.9indirect
crates.iofoldhash0.1.5indirect
crates.iogetrandom0.3.4indirect
crates.iogetrandom0.4.3indirect
crates.iogranit-parser0.0.7indirect
crates.iohashbrown0.15.5indirect
crates.ioheck0.5.0indirect
crates.iois_terminal_polyfill1.70.2indirect
crates.ioitoa1.0.18indirect
crates.iojs-sys0.3.103indirect
crates.iolibc0.2.186indirect
crates.iolinux-raw-sys0.12.1indirect
crates.iomemchr2.8.3indirect
crates.ionohash-hasher0.2.0indirect
crates.ionum-traits0.2.19indirect
crates.ioobject0.37.3indirect
crates.ioonce_cell1.21.4indirect
crates.ioonce_cell_polyfill1.70.2indirect
crates.iopredicates3.1.4indirect
crates.iopredicates-core1.0.10indirect
crates.iopredicates-tree1.0.13indirect
crates.ioproc-macro21.0.106indirect
crates.iopsm0.1.31indirect
crates.ioquote1.0.46indirect
crates.ior-efi5.3.0indirect
crates.ior-efi6.0.0indirect
crates.ioregex-automata0.4.16indirect
crates.ioregex-syntax0.8.11indirect
crates.iorustix1.1.4indirect
crates.iorustversion1.0.23indirect
crates.ioserde1.0.228indirect
crates.ioserde_core1.0.228indirect
crates.ioserde_derive1.0.228indirect
crates.ioshlex2.0.1indirect
crates.iosmallvec1.15.2indirect
crates.iostacker0.1.24indirect
crates.iostrsim0.11.1indirect
crates.iosyn2.0.119indirect
crates.iotermtree0.5.1indirect
crates.iounicode-ident1.0.24indirect
crates.iounicode-segmentation1.13.3indirect
crates.iounicode-width0.2.2indirect
crates.ioutf8parse0.2.2indirect
crates.ioversion_check0.9.5indirect
crates.iowait-timeout0.2.1indirect
crates.iowasip21.0.4+wasi-0.2.12indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen0.2.126indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-macro0.2.126indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-macro-support0.2.126indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-shared0.2.126indirect
crates.iowindows-link0.2.1indirect
crates.iowindows-sys0.61.2indirect
crates.iowit-bindgen0.57.1indirect
crates.iozerocopy0.8.54indirect
crates.iozerocopy-derive0.8.54indirect
crates.iozmij1.0.23indirect
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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticscrates.io.