Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-13 08:56 UTC

ash-project / ash_sqlite

The SQLite data layer for Ash Framework.

ElixirCustom license★ 31 stars⑂ 32 forkssince Sep 2023View on GitHub ↗

ash-project/ash_sqlite holds a health index of 81 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (85/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (49/100). It was last updated 7 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

81
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.

81
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 69 is calibrated to 81 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Ash FrameworkOrganization
387 followers61 public repossince Dec 2019

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Hexash_sqlite0.2.193,406267 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

85Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 7 days ago
17.3/36Commit cadence — 25/52 weeks with commits
16.5/18Commit volume — 67 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 17 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year67
human_commit_share0.77
days_since_last_push7
active_weeks_last_year25
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 5 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 7 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~102.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count5
latest_release_tagv0.2.19
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release7
mean_days_between_releases102.5
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?

60Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
24/60Stars — 31 stars
12.4/25Forks — 32 forks
2.7/15Watchers — 4 watchers
Inputs used
forks32
stars31
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

86Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5License — license file present, not a recognized license
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseno
readme_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
47.1/80Monthly downloads — 3,406 downloads/month across hex
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesash_sqlite
dependents—
ecosystemshex
total_downloads38,094
monthly_downloads3,406
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?

70Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 80% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 23 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled23
top_contributor_share0.799
How it's scored
40.9/42Issue resolution — 97% of issues closed
25/30PR acceptance — 156/187 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 7/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs156
open_issues1
closed_issues37
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d4
prs_decided_30d4
issue_closed_ratio0.974
closed_unmerged_prs31
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
18.6/25Owner reach — 387 followers of ash-project
25/25Track record — 61 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers387
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginash-project
public_repos61
account_age_days2,474

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on hex
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 7 days ago
20/20Version history — 26 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesash_sqlite
ecosystemshex
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish7

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

69Good · 19% of overall
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
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://hexdocs.pm/ash_sqlite
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsash, data-layer, elixir, sqlite
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://hexdocs.pm/ash_sqlite
docs_sitehttps://hexdocs.pm/ash_sqlite
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-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5Code-Review — Found 7/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
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 — 17 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
3.5/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 7
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
3/7.5Vulnerabilities — 6 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
14.8/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 2 affected: ash_sql 0.7.0 (moderate 6.8), igniter 0.8.3 (unknown)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
40/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory has been public longer than 90 days
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories6
affected_packages2
assessed_packages57
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitymoderate 1, unknown 1
direct_affected_packages2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 57 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.

49Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 76 of 77 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.987
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — mix.exs (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 23 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
lockfilesmix.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsmix.exs
dependency_bot_commit_share0.23
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Elixir without a type-check config
53.8/55Manageable file sizes — 2/94 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageElixir
largest_source_bytes82,028
source_files_sampled94
oversized_source_files2

Key facts

31GitHub stars
23contributors
67commits, last 12 months
7days since last push
5releases
1bus factor
1open issues
Hexpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 32 ⇿
0Stars
32Forks
5Releases

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.

01325383212023-102025-042026-09
Major 0Minor 0Patch 5

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.9 / 10
5.9aggregate

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 · 2026-09-13 08:56 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 7/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained17 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
7SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 7
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
4Vulnerabilities6 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 8
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Hexecto_sql~> 3.13mix.exs
Hexecto_sqlite3~> 0.12mix.exs
Hexecto_libsql~> 0.9mix.exs
Hexecto~> 3.13mix.exs
Hexjason~> 1.0mix.exs
Hexash~> 3.33mix.exs
Hexash_sql~> 0.2 and >= 0.6.9mix.exs
Hexigniter~> 0.6 and >= 0.6.14mix.exs
All dependencies 57

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 8 direct and 49 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Hexash3.33.0direct
Hexash_sql0.7.0direct
Hexecto3.14.2direct
Hexecto_libsql0.9.1direct
Hexecto_sql3.14.0direct
Hexecto_sqlite30.24.1direct
Hexigniter0.8.3direct
Hexjason1.4.5direct
Hexbunt1.0.0indirect
Hexcc_precompiler0.1.11indirect
Hexcredo1.7.19indirect
Hexcrux0.1.4indirect
Hexdb_connection2.10.2indirect
Hexdecimal3.1.1indirect
Hexdialyxir1.4.7indirect
Hexearmark_parser1.4.45indirect
Hexelixir_make0.10.0indirect
Hexerlex0.2.9indirect
Hexets0.9.0indirect
Hexex_ast0.13.1indirect
Hexex_check0.16.0indirect
Hexex_doc0.40.3indirect
Hexexqlite0.37.0indirect
Hexfile_system1.1.1indirect
Hexfinch0.23.0indirect
Hexgit_cli0.3.0indirect
Hexgit_ops2.12.2indirect
Hexglob_ex0.1.12indirect
Hexhpax1.0.4indirect
Hexiterex0.1.2indirect
Hexmakeup1.2.1indirect
Hexmakeup_elixir1.0.1indirect
Hexmakeup_erlang1.1.0indirect
Hexmime2.0.7indirect
Hexmint1.10.0indirect
Hexmix_audit2.1.5indirect
Hexmultigraph0.16.1-mg.4indirect
Hexnimble_options1.1.1indirect
Hexnimble_parsec1.4.2indirect
Hexnimble_pool1.1.0indirect
Hexowl0.13.1indirect
Hexreactor1.0.6indirect
Hexreq0.7.4indirect
Hexrewrite1.3.0indirect
Hexrustler_precompiled0.9.0indirect
Hexsimple_sat0.1.4indirect
Hexsobelow0.15.0indirect
Hexsourceror1.12.2indirect
Hexspark2.7.2indirect
Hexspitfire0.4.1indirect
Hexsplode0.3.2indirect
Hexstream_data1.4.0indirect
Hextelemetry1.4.2indirect
Hextext_diff0.1.0indirect
Hexyamerl0.10.0indirect
Hexyaml_elixir2.12.2indirect
Hexymlr5.1.6indirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 57 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 2 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
ash_sql0.7.0directmoderate50.7.1
igniter0.8.3directunknown10.8.4

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 — Hex.