Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-19 15:50 UTC

bashly-framework / bashly

Bash command line framework and CLI generator

RubyMIT★ 2,434 stars⑂ 94 forkssince Nov 2019View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

bashly-framework/bashly holds a health index of 83 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (87/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (46/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

83
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.

83
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 70 is calibrated to 83 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Bashly FrameworkOrganization
6 followers6 public repossince Aug 2025

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemsbashly1.4.0-1110 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

87Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
13.8/36Commit cadence20/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume127 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year127
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year20

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases94 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 40 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~41.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count94
latest_release_tagv1.4.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release40
mean_days_between_releases41.8
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?

73Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
54.9/60Stars2,434 stars
16.4/25Forks94 forks
6.2/15Watchers14 watchers
Inputs used
forks94
stars2,434
watchers14
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
55.8/80Total downloads232,160 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesbashly
dependents
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads232,160
monthly_downloads
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?

61Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.3/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 98% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth12 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled12
top_contributor_share0.985
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
28.5/30PR acceptance369/388 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance0/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 1/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs369
open_issues0
closed_issues252
prs_merged_7d4
prs_decided_7d6
prs_merged_30d4
prs_decided_30d6
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs19
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
6.1/25Owner reach6 followers of bashly-framework
8.2/25Track record6 public repos, account ~1 yr old
Inputs used
followers6
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginbashly-framework
public_repos6
account_age_days381
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history111 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesbashly
ecosystemsrubygems
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 workflows4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests6 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://bashly.dev
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics7 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsbash, ruby, cli-generator, cli-framework, code-generator, cli, bash-scripting
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://bashly.dev
docs_sitehttps://bashly.dev
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

53Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests6 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 1/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
3/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Signed-Releases. 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.

46Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
11.2/40Legible commit history21 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.21
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeRuby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/123 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes12,123
source_files_sampled123
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
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

2,434GitHub stars
12contributors
127commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
94releases
1bus factor
0open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 94 ⇿
0Stars
94Forks
87Releases

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.

02040608010094132020-122023-092026-06
Major 1Minor 7Patch 79

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.3 / 10
5.3aggregate

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 · 2026-08-19 15:50 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
10CI-Tests6 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 1/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
6Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 5
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsrspecGemfile
RubyGemsrspec_approvalsGemfile
RubyGemsrunfile~> 1.0Gemfile
RubyGemsrunfile-tasks~> 1.0Gemfile
RubyGemssimplecovGemfile
All dependencies 13

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 8 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsrspecdirect
RubyGemsrspec_approvalsdirect
RubyGemsrunfiledirect
RubyGemsrunfile-tasksdirect
RubyGemssimplecovdirect
RubyGemscolsoleindirect
RubyGemscompletelyindirect
RubyGemsgtxindirect
RubyGemslistenindirect
RubyGemslpindirect
RubyGemsmister_binindirect
RubyGemsrequiresindirect
RubyGemstty-markdownindirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsRubyGems.