Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-09 15:47 UTC

ash-project / igniter

A code generation and project patching framework.

ElixirCustom license★ 403 stars⑂ 75 forkssince May 2024View on GitHub ↗

ash-project/igniter holds a health index of 88 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (94/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (50/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts 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

Ash FrameworkOrganization
388 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
Hexigniter0.8.4199,3972101 day ago
Hexigniter_new0.5.341,9616276 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

94Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 1 days ago
25.6/36Commit cadence — 37/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 105 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_year105
human_commit_share0.82
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year37

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 28 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 1 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~19.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count28
latest_release_tagv0.8.4
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1
mean_days_between_releases19.6
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?

77Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
42.2/60Stars — 403 stars
15.6/25Forks — 75 forks
3.9/15Watchers — 6 watchers
Inputs used
forks75
stars403
watchers6
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
70.7/80Monthly downloads — 201,358 downloads/month across hex
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesigniter, igniter_new
dependents—
ecosystemshex
total_downloads2,295,587
monthly_downloads201,358
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
3.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 84% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 60 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 9 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled60
top_contributor_share0.836
How it's scored
36.7/42Issue resolution — 87% of issues closed
28.2/30PR acceptance — 221/235 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 2/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 7/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs221
open_issues20
closed_issues139
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio0.874
closed_unmerged_prs14
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d2
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
18.6/25Owner reach — 388 followers of ash-project
25/25Track record — 61 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers388
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginash-project
public_repos61
account_age_days2,471

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 2 package(s) on hex
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 1 days ago
20/20Version history — 210 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesigniter, igniter_new
ecosystemshex
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish1

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

65Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 1 out of 12 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

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://hexdocs.pm/igniter/readme.html
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscode-generation, elixir, installers, source-code
has_wikino
homepagehttps://hexdocs.pm/igniter/readme.html
docs_sitehttps://hexdocs.pm/igniter/readme.html
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

67Good · 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 — 1 out of 12 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 9 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 — 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
0.5/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 1
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6/7.5Vulnerabilities — 2 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.

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
advisories2
affected_packages1
assessed_packages45
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 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 45 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.

50Moderate · 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 — 82 of 82 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — installer/mix.exs, mix.exs (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
2/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 18 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_share0.01
toolchain_manifestsinstaller/mix.exs, mix.exs
dependency_bot_commit_share0.18
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Elixir without a type-check config
54.5/55Manageable file sizes — 1/112 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageElixir
largest_source_bytes65,053
source_files_sampled112
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

403GitHub stars
60contributors
105commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
28releases
1bus factor
20open 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 ★ / 75 ⇿
0Stars
75Forks
27Releases

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.

01325385063757522024-062025-072026-09
Major 0Minor 2Patch 25

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 · 2026-09-09 15:47 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0CI-Tests1 out of 12 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 9 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
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
1SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 1
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 9
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Hexrewrite~> 1.1 and >= 1.1.1mix.exs
Hexglob_ex~> 0.1.7mix.exs
Hexspitfire~> 0.1 and >= 0.1.3mix.exs
Hexsourceror~> 1.4mix.exs
Hexjason~> 1.4.5mix.exs
Hexreq~> 0.5mix.exs
Hexphx_new~> 1.7mix.exs
Hexex_ast~> 0.5mix.exs
Hexowl~> 0.11mix.exs
All dependencies 45

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 9 direct and 36 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Hexex_ast0.13.1direct
Hexglob_ex0.1.12direct
Hexjason1.4.5direct
Hexowl0.13.1direct
Hexphx_new1.8.13direct
Hexreq0.7.4direct
Hexrewrite1.3.0direct
Hexsourceror1.12.2direct
Hexspitfire0.4.0direct
Hexbenchee1.5.1indirect
Hexbunt1.0.0indirect
Hexcredo1.7.19indirect
Hexdecimal3.1.1indirect
Hexdeep_merge1.0.2indirect
Hexdialyxir1.4.7indirect
Hexdoctor0.23.0indirect
Hexearmark_parser1.4.39indirect
Hexearmark_parser1.4.44indirect
Hexeflame1.0.1indirect
Hexerlex0.2.9indirect
Hexex_check0.16.0indirect
Hexex_doc0.34.0indirect
Hexex_doc0.40.3indirect
Hexfile_system1.1.1indirect
Hexgit_cli0.3.0indirect
Hexham0.3.2indirect
Hexhpax1.0.4indirect
Hexmakeup1.1.2indirect
Hexmakeup1.2.2indirect
Hexmakeup_elixir0.16.2indirect
Hexmakeup_elixir1.0.1indirect
Hexmakeup_erlang1.0.0indirect
Hexmakeup_erlang1.1.0indirect
Hexmimic2.3.0indirect
Hexmint1.9.3indirect
Hexmix_audit2.1.5indirect
Hexnimble_options1.1.1indirect
Hexnimble_parsec1.4.0indirect
Hexnimble_parsec1.4.2indirect
Hexnimble_pool1.1.0indirect
Hexstatistex1.1.1indirect
Hextelemetry1.4.2indirect
Hextext_diff0.1.0indirect
Hexyamerl0.10.0indirect
Hexyaml_elixir2.12.2indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 45 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
mint1.9.3indirecthigh21.10.0

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.