Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-18 22:43 UTC

aspose-words / Aspose.Words-for-Java

Aspose.Words for Java examples, plugins and showcases

Java · Python · PHPMIT★ 435 stars⑂ 211 forkssince Nov 2011View on GitHub ↗
KindNetwork serviceCommand-line toolhow this is determined

aspose-words/Aspose.Words-for-Java holds a health index of 27 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (68/100) and lowest on Security (17/100). It was last updated 20 days ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

27
overall / 100
At Risk

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.

27
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 47 is calibrated to 45 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

54 followers17 public repossince Nov 2011

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemsasposewordsjavaforrubypoints to another repo — not scored0.0.5-54065 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

39Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 20 days ago
0/36Commit cadence — 0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume — 0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push20
active_weeks_last_year0
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 13 releases published
0/36Release recency — latest release 3,841 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~30.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count13
latest_release_tagAspose-dotCMS-Export-To-Word-v1.0.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release3,841
mean_days_between_releases30.3

Community & Adoption

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

61Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
42.8/60Stars — 435 stars
19.4/25Forks — 211 forks
9.1/15Watchers — 45 watchers
Inputs used
forks211
stars435
watchers45
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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_badges2
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

68Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor — 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
16.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 26% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 28 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled28
top_contributor_share0.257
How it's scored
31.5/42Issue resolution — 75% of issues closed
22.9/30PR acceptance — 29/38 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs29
open_issues19
closed_issues57
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.75
closed_unmerged_prs9
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. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
12.5/25Owner reach — 54 followers of aspose-words
21.1/25Track record — 17 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers54
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginaspose-words
public_repos17
account_age_days5,445

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

44Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://products.aspose.com/words/java
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://products.aspose.com/words/java
docs_sitehttps://products.aspose.com/words/java
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

17Critical · 16% of overall
How it's scored
2.2/7.5Binary-Artifacts — binaries present in source code
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — no data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 11 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
8.4/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 4 affected: org.apache.struts:struts-core 1.3.10 (high 8.2), org.apache.poi:poi-ooxml 3.13 (moderate 5.3), org.apache.poi:poi-scratchpad 3.13 (moderate 5.5), +1 more
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
24.4/40No advisories left outstanding — 4 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 1,688 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories11
affected_packages7
assessed_packages27
unassessed_packages4
affected_by_severityhigh 3, moderate 4
direct_affected_packages4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 27 resolved dependencies against OSV. 4 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.

46Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.aspose.com/llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — 0 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://docs.aspose.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — Examples/ApiExamples/Java/pom.xml, Examples/DocsExamples/Java/pom.xml, Plugins/Aspose.Words Java for dotCMS/AsposeDotCMSExportToWord.servlet/build.gradle (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Java (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsExamples/ApiExamples/Java/pom.xml, Examples/DocsExamples/Java/pom.xml, Plugins/Aspose.Words Java for dotCMS/AsposeDotCMSExportToWord.servlet/build.gradle, Plugins/Aspose_Words_Java_for_Docx4j/pom.xml, Plugins/Aspose_Words_for_Apache_POI/pom.xml, Plugins/Aspose_Words_for_Struts/pom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Java (statically typed)
53.1/55Manageable file sizes — 26/762 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJava
largest_source_bytes386,998
source_files_sampled762
oversized_source_files26
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
0/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

435GitHub stars
28contributors
0commits, last 12 months
20days since last push
13releases
3bus factor
19open issues
—package ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch maven package 'com.aspose:AsposeWordsforStruts' from its registry
  • Could not fetch maven package 'com.aspose:words-java' from its registry
  • Could not fetch maven package 'com.aspose:AsposeWordsJavaForDocx4j' from its registry
  • Could not fetch pypi package 'asposewordsjavajython' from its registry
  • rubygems package 'asposewordsjavaforruby' points at a different repository (https://github.com/asposewords/Aspose_Words_Java/tree/master/Plugins/Aspose_Words_Java_for_Ruby); excluded from ecosystem scoring

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 211 ⇿
0Stars
211Forks
13Releases

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.

0408012016020024020642014-022020-052026-08
Major 0Minor 0Patch 1

Each point covers 12 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 1.0 / 10
1.0aggregate

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 · 2026-10-18 22:42 UTC

3Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
0Vulnerabilities11 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 11
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Mavencom.aspose:aspose-words15.6.0Plugins/Aspose_Words_Java_for_Docx4j/pom.xml
Mavenjavax.media.jai:com.springsource.javax.media.jai.core1.1.3Plugins/Aspose_Words_Java_for_Docx4j/pom.xml
Mavenorg.docx4j:docx4j3.2.2Plugins/Aspose_Words_Java_for_Docx4j/pom.xml
Mavencom.aspose:aspose-words15.6.0Plugins/Aspose_Words_for_Apache_POI/pom.xml
Mavenjavax.media.jai:com.springsource.javax.media.jai.core1.1.3Plugins/Aspose_Words_for_Apache_POI/pom.xml
Mavenorg.apache.poi:poi-ooxml3.13Plugins/Aspose_Words_for_Apache_POI/pom.xml
Mavenorg.apache.poi:poi-scratchpad3.13Plugins/Aspose_Words_for_Apache_POI/pom.xml
Mavenorg.apache.struts:struts-core1.3.10Plugins/Aspose_Words_for_Struts/pom.xml
Mavenorg.apache.struts:struts-extras1.3.10Plugins/Aspose_Words_for_Struts/pom.xml
Mavenorg.apache.struts:struts-taglib1.3.10Plugins/Aspose_Words_for_Struts/pom.xml
Mavencom.aspose:aspose-words15.5.0Plugins/Aspose_Words_for_Struts/pom.xml
All dependencies 31

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 11 direct and 20 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavencom.aspose:aspose-words15.5.0direct
Mavencom.aspose:aspose-words15.6.0direct
Mavencom.aspose:aspose-words25.8direct
Mavencom.aspose:aspose-words25.9direct
Mavenjavax.media.jai:com.springsource.javax.media.jai.core1.1.3direct
Mavenorg.apache.poi:poi-ooxml3.13direct
Mavenorg.apache.poi:poi-scratchpad3.13direct
Mavenorg.apache.struts:struts-core1.3.10direct
Mavenorg.apache.struts:struts-extras1.3.10direct
Mavenorg.apache.struts:struts-taglib1.3.10direct
Mavenorg.docx4j:docx4j3.2.2direct
Mavencom.aspose:aspose-barcode25.6indirect
Mavencom.aspose:aspose-barcode25.8indirect
Mavencom.aspose:aspose-email25.6indirect
Mavencom.aspose:aspose-pdf25.6indirect
Mavencom.aspose:aspose-pdf25.8indirect
Mavencommons-io:commons-io2.16.1indirect
Mavennet.sf.ucanaccess:ucanaccess3.0.6indirect
Mavenorg.apache.commons:commons-collections44.4indirect
Mavenorg.apache.commons:commons-lang33.17.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin3.8.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin3.0.0-M4indirect
Mavenorg.apache.poi:poi5.0.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.tomcat:tomcat-servlet-api7.0.30indirect
Mavenorg.apache.xmlgraphics:batik-transcoder1.14indirect
Mavenorg.jsoup:jsoup1.18.1indirect
Mavenorg.testng:testng7.5.1indirect
RubyGemsbundler—indirect
RubyGemsrake—indirect
RubyGemsrjb—indirect
RubyGemsrspec—indirect
Dependency advisories 7

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 27 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 7 carry known advisories, of which 4 are direct. 4 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
org.apache.struts:struts-core1.3.10directhigh46.1.2.1
org.apache.xmlgraphics:batik-transcoder1.14indirecthigh11.17
org.jsoup:jsoup1.18.1indirecthigh21.23.2
org.apache.poi:poi-ooxml3.13directmoderate15.4.0
org.apache.poi:poi-scratchpad3.13directmoderate15.2.1
org.apache.struts:struts-extras1.3.10directmoderate1—
org.apache.commons:commons-lang33.17.0indirectmoderate13.18.0

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 — RubyGems.