Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-26 17:05 UTC

asterisk-labs / taco

AI-ready Earth Observation datasets

Python · C++ · JavaScriptNo license detected★ 7 stars⑂ 1 forksince Apr 2026View on GitHub ↗

asterisk-labs/taco holds a health index of 65 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (80/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (29/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

65
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.

65
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 60 is calibrated to 65 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

asterisk labsOrganization
68 followers14 public repossince Sep 2024

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPItaco-eo0.12.03,251190 days agocloud-optimizedcozipearth-observationgeospatialmachine-learningparquettaco
npm@asterisk-labs/taco0.12.01,08190 days agotacoearth-observationgeospatialparquetcloud-optimizedrange-requests

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

78Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence — 8/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 261 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_year261
human_commit_share0.89
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year8
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 34 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~0.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count34
latest_release_tagv0.12.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases0.3

Community & Adoption

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

29At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
12.6/60Stars — 7 stars
0/25Forks — 1 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars7
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
0/22.5License — no license file detected
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseno
readme_badges9
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
48.5/80Monthly downloads — 4,332 downloads/month across npm, pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagestaco-eo, @asterisk-labs/taco
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm, pypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads4,332
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?

55Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 99% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.988
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
26.7/30PR acceptance — 8/9 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_prs8
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs1
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
13.2/25Owner reach — 68 followers of asterisk-labs
12.6/25Track record — 14 public repos, account ~2 yr old
Inputs used
followers68
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginasterisk-labs
public_repos14
account_age_days740

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 2 package(s) on npm, pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 19 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagestaco-eo, @asterisk-labs/taco
ecosystemsnpm, pypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — python/pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

80Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://asterisk.coop/taco
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikino
homepagehttps://asterisk.coop/taco
docs_sitehttps://asterisk.coop/taco
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

54Moderate · 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
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 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
0/2.5License — license file not detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
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.
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate5.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

59Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — 0 of 89 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — python/pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checking — javascript/tsconfig.json, python/taco/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsjavascript/tsconfig.json, python/taco/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (javascript/tsconfig.json, python/taco/py.typed)
54.6/55Manageable file sizes — 1/134 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes76,059
source_files_sampled134
oversized_source_files1
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 — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
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

7GitHub stars
2contributors
261commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
34releases
1bus factor
0open issues
npm, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
  • deps.dev does not index npm:@asterisk-labs/taco@0.12.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.4 / 10
5.4aggregate

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 · 2026-09-26 17:05 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
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 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
0Licenselicense file not detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
1Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
0SASTno SAST tool detected
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 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmhyparquet^1.25.0javascript/package.json
npmhyparquet-compressors^1.1.1javascript/package.json
PyPIcffi>=1.17python/pyproject.toml
PyPIduckdb>=1.5.5python/pyproject.toml
PyPIpyarrow>=14python/pyproject.toml
PyPItqdm>=4.66python/pyproject.toml
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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 — PyPI, npm.