Public record
Software health reportschema 0.12.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-18 00:15 UTC

basmilius / flux

Flux is a component library for Vue 3.x.

Vue · TypeScript · SCSSMIT★ 11 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Apr 2024View on GitHub ↗
KindWeb interfacehow this is determined

basmilius/flux holds a health index of 63 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (92/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (32/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

63
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

63
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 59 is calibrated to 63 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Bas MiliusPersonal account
130 followers66 public repossince Aug 2011Bas Milius

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

92Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 1 days ago
22.2/36Commit cadence32/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume371 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year371
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year32

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases100 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 1 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~0.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag3.8.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1
mean_days_between_releases0.8
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?

32At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
16.2/60Stars11 stars
0/25Forks0 forks
0/15Watchers2 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars11
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

47Weak · 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
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth4 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.985
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolutionno issues or no data
23.6/30PR acceptance22/28 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 5/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs22
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio
closed_unmerged_prs6
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
15.2/25Owner reach130 followers of basmilius
25/25Track record66 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers130
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginbasmilius
public_repos66
account_age_days5,452
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

66Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests5 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://flux-ui.dev
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics7 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscomponents, flux, ui, ui-components, ui-framework, vue, vue3
has_wikino
homepagehttps://flux-ui.dev
docs_sitehttps://flux-ui.dev
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

56Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests5 out of 5 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
0.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 5/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
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 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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
6.8/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6/7.5Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate5.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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.

47Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsCLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes16,212
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingdocs/tsconfig.json, packages/application/tsconfig.json, packages/components/tsconfig.json, packages/flow/tsconfig.json, packages/internals/tsconfig.json, packages/statistics/tsconfig.json, packages/types/tsconfig.json, packages/visuals/tsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configsdocs/tsconfig.json, packages/application/tsconfig.json, packages/components/tsconfig.json, packages/flow/tsconfig.json, packages/internals/tsconfig.json, packages/statistics/tsconfig.json, packages/types/tsconfig.json, packages/visuals/tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codeVue with type-check config (docs/tsconfig.json, packages/application/tsconfig.json, packages/components/tsconfig.json, packages/flow/tsconfig.json, packages/internals/tsconfig.json, packages/statistics/tsconfig.json, packages/types/tsconfig.json, packages/visuals/tsconfig.json)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/207 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageVue
largest_source_bytes26,308
source_files_sampled207
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

11GitHub stars
4contributors
371commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
0open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.6 / 10
5.6aggregate

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 · 2026-07-18 00:15 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests5 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 5/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
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 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 20
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@basmilius/common^3.55.0docs/package.json
npm@faker-js/faker^10.5.0docs/package.json
npm@flux-ui/applicationworkspace:*docs/package.json
npm@flux-ui/componentsworkspace:*docs/package.json
npm@flux-ui/flowworkspace:*docs/package.json
npm@flux-ui/internalsworkspace:*docs/package.json
npm@flux-ui/statisticsworkspace:*docs/package.json
npm@flux-ui/visualsworkspace:*docs/package.json
npm@fortawesome/fontawesome-common-types^7.3.1docs/package.json
npm@fortawesome/pro-regular-svg-icons^7.3.1docs/package.json
npmecharts^6.1.0docs/package.json
npmluxon^3.7.2docs/package.json
npmvitepress^2.0.0-alpha.18docs/package.json
npmvitepress-plugin-example^1.6.0docs/package.json
npmvitepress-plugin-group-icons^1.7.5docs/package.json
npmvitepress-plugin-llms^1.13.3docs/package.json
npmvitepress-plugin-render^1.6.0docs/package.json
npmvue^3.6.0-beta.17docs/package.json
npmvue-i18n^11.4.6docs/package.json
npmvue-router^5.2.0docs/package.json
All dependencies 31

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 14 direct and 17 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@basmilius/common^3.55.0direct
npm@faker-js/faker^10.5.0direct
npm@fortawesome/fontawesome-common-types^7.3.1direct
npm@fortawesome/pro-regular-svg-icons^7.3.1direct
npmecharts^6.1.0direct
npmluxon^3.7.2direct
npmvitepress^2.0.0-alpha.18direct
npmvitepress-plugin-example^1.6.0direct
npmvitepress-plugin-group-icons^1.7.5direct
npmvitepress-plugin-llms^1.13.3direct
npmvitepress-plugin-render^1.6.0direct
npmvue^3.6.0-beta.17direct
npmvue-i18n^11.4.6direct
npmvue-router^5.2.0direct
npm@basmilius/utils^3.55.0indirect
npm@basmilius/vite-preset^3.55.0indirect
npm@types/bun^1.3.14indirect
npm@types/lodash-es^4.17.12indirect
npm@types/luxon^3.7.2indirect
npm@types/node^26.1.1indirect
npm@vitejs/plugin-vue^6.0.8indirect
npm@vue/tsconfig^0.9.1indirect
npmclsx^2.1.1indirect
npmimask^7.6.1indirect
npmlodash-es^4.18.1indirect
npmrough-notation^0.5.1indirect
npmsass-embedded^1.100.0indirect
npmtsdown^0.22.9indirect
npmtypescript6.0.3indirect
npmvite^8.1.5indirect
npmvue-tsc^3.3.7indirect
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 v0.12.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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