Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-20 00:05 UTC

apache / calcite

Apache Calcite

JavaApache-2.0★ 5,195 stars⑂ 2,535 forkssince Jun 2014View on GitHub ↗

apache/calcite holds a health index of 91 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (85/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (70/100). It was last updated today. 4 contributors account for most of its recent work.

91
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.

91
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 77 is calibrated to 91 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

The Apache Software FoundationOrganization · verified domain
24,685 followers3,187 public repossince Jan 2009

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

73Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

100Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
36/36Commit cadence — 52/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 611 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_year611
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year52
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 1 version tags (no GitHub releases)
0/36Release recency — latest release 2,419 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — cadence unknown (single release)
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count1
latest_release_tagv1.23.0-rc1
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release2,419
mean_days_between_releases—
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?

85Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
60/60Stars — 5,195 stars
25/25Forks — 2,535 forks
12.3/15Watchers — 163 watchers
Inputs used
forks2,535
stars5,195
watchers163
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

81Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
43.2/54Bus factor — 4 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
14/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 38% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 99 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 26 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor4
contributors_sampled99
top_contributor_share0.376
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
14/30PR acceptance — 2,331/5,003 decided PRs merged
9.3/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 5/7 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
13.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 27/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
merged_prs2,331
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d14
prs_decided_7d16
prs_merged_30d43
prs_decided_30d55
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs2,672
first_time_authors_30d5
first_time_prs_merged_30d5
first_time_prs_decided_30d7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 24,685 followers of apache
25/25Track record — 3,187 public repos, account ~17 yr old
Inputs used
followers24,685
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginapache
public_repos3,187
account_age_days6,484

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

70Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 7 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 28 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://calcite.apache.org/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsgeospatial, calcite, java, big-data, hadoop, sql
has_wikino
homepagehttps://calcite.apache.org/
docs_sitehttps://calcite.apache.org/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

78Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 28 out of 28 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 27/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 26 contributing companies or organizations
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
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
3/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 6
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6.8/7.5Vulnerabilities — 1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate7.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

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
advisories1
affected_packages1
assessed_packages38
unassessed_packages9
affected_by_severitylow 1
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 38 resolved dependencies against OSV. 9 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.

73Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
9.6/40Legible commit history — 18 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.18
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes302
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — arrow/build.gradle.kts, babel/build.gradle.kts, bom/build.gradle.kts (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Java (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 7 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.07
toolchain_manifestsarrow/build.gradle.kts, babel/build.gradle.kts, bom/build.gradle.kts, build.gradle.kts, buildSrc/build.gradle.kts, cassandra/build.gradle.kts, core/build.gradle.kts, druid/build.gradle.kts, elasticsearch/build.gradle.kts, example/csv/build.gradle.kts, example/function/build.gradle.kts, file/build.gradle.kts, geode/build.gradle.kts, innodb/build.gradle.kts, kafka/build.gradle.kts, linq4j/build.gradle.kts, mongodb/build.gradle.kts, pig/build.gradle.kts, piglet/build.gradle.kts, plus/build.gradle.kts, redis/build.gradle.kts, release/build.gradle.kts, server/build.gradle.kts, spark/build.gradle.kts, splunk/build.gradle.kts, testkit/build.gradle.kts, ubenchmark/build.gradle.kts
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Java (statically typed)
53.7/55Manageable file sizes — 61/2,663 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJava
largest_source_bytes875,700
source_files_sampled2,663
oversized_source_files61
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 — example, examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexample, examples
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

5,195GitHub stars
99contributors
611commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
1releases
4bus factor
0open issues
Maven, RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • First-time contributor figures cover 12 of 31 authors (cap 12)

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 2,535 ⇿
0Stars
2,535Forks

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.

Only the most recent history is shown — this repository exceeds the collection window, so the earliest history is not captured.

1,4001,6001,8002,0002,2002,4002,6002,535112021-112024-052026-10

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.2 / 10
7.2aggregate

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 · 2026-10-20 00:04 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests28 out of 28 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 27/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
10Contributorsproject has 26 contributing companies or organizations
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
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
6SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 6
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsjekyll~>4site/Gemfile
RubyGemswebrick~> 1.9.1site/Gemfile
RubyGemsnokogiri~> 1.19.4site/Gemfile
RubyGemscsv~> 3.3.2site/Gemfile
RubyGemsbase64~> 0.2.0site/Gemfile
RubyGemsjekyll-redirect-from—site/Gemfile
All dependencies 47

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 6 direct and 41 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsbase640.2.0direct
RubyGemscsv3.3.2direct
RubyGemsjekyll4.4.1direct
RubyGemsjekyll-redirect-from0.17.0direct
RubyGemsnokogiri1.19.4direct
RubyGemswebrick1.9.2direct
Mavencom.google.guava:guava—indirect
Mavenorg.apache.calcite:calcite-core—indirect
Mavenorg.apache.calcite:calcite-linq4j—indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-dependency-plugin—indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-shade-plugin—indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.janino:commons-compiler—indirect
Mavenorg.openjdk.jmh:jmh-core—indirect
Mavenorg.openjdk.jmh:jmh-generator-annprocess—indirect
Mavenorg.owasp:dependency-check-maven—indirect
RubyGemsaddressable2.9.0indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal3.1.8indirect
RubyGemscolorator1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.8indirect
RubyGemsem-websocket0.5.3indirect
RubyGemseventmachine1.2.7indirect
RubyGemsffi1.17.4indirect
RubyGemsforwardable-extended2.6.0indirect
RubyGemsgoogle-protobuf4.36.2indirect
RubyGemshttp_parser.rb0.8.1indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.15.2indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-sass-converter3.1.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-watch2.2.1indirect
RubyGemsjson2.9.1indirect
RubyGemskramdown2.5.2indirect
RubyGemskramdown-parser-gfm1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsliquid4.0.4indirect
RubyGemslisten3.10.1indirect
RubyGemslogger1.6.4indirect
RubyGemsmercenary0.4.0indirect
RubyGemspathutil0.16.2indirect
RubyGemspublic_suffix7.0.5indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrake13.4.2indirect
RubyGemsrb-fsevent0.11.2indirect
RubyGemsrb-inotify0.11.1indirect
RubyGemsrexml3.4.4indirect
RubyGemsrouge4.7.0indirect
RubyGemssafe_yaml1.0.5indirect
RubyGemssass-embedded1.105.1indirect
RubyGemsterminal-table3.0.2indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width2.6.0indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 38 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 9 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
json2.9.1indirectlow12.19.9

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.