Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-13 02:01 UTC

bikeshaving / crank

The Just JavaScript UI Framework

TypeScriptMIT★ 2,798 stars⑂ 83 forkssince Sep 2019View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

bikeshaving/crank holds a health index of 83 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (84/100) and lowest on Security (46/100). It was last updated 10 days ago. 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

Bike ShavingOrganization
19 followers17 public repossince May 2019

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npm@b9g/crankdown0.1.3263490 days agocrankmarkdownmarkedjsx
npmastro-crank0.3.0293242 days agoastroastro-componentastro-integrationcrankrendererwithastro
npmcreate-crank0.1.3194229 days agocrankcrankjscreatescaffoldstartertemplate
npmeslint-plugin-crank0.2.22,1184230 days agoeslinteslintplugincrankjsx
npm@b9g/crank0.7.123,7093738 days ago—

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

79Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 10 days ago
20.1/36Commit cadence — 29/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 414 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year414
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push10
active_weeks_last_year29
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 7 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 38 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~64.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count7
latest_release_tagv0.7.12
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release38
mean_days_between_releases64.3

Community & Adoption

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

78Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
55.9/60Stars — 2,798 stars
16/25Forks — 83 forks
8.5/15Watchers — 35 watchers
Inputs used
forks83
stars2,798
watchers35
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code 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_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
50.5/80Monthly downloads — 6,138 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@b9g/crankdown, astro-crank, create-crank, eslint-plugin-crank, @b9g/crank
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads6,138
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?

62Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 97% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 25 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 6 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled25
top_contributor_share0.97
How it's scored
36.7/42Issue resolution — 87% of issues closed
24/30PR acceptance — 129/161 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs129
open_issues24
closed_issues166
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d3
issue_closed_ratio0.874
closed_unmerged_prs32
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
9.4/25Owner reach — 19 followers of bikeshaving
21.1/25Track record — 17 public repos, account ~7 yr old
Inputs used
followers19
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginbikeshaving
public_repos17
account_age_days2,692

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 5 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 38 days ago
20/20Version history — 37 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@b9g/crankdown, astro-crank, create-crank, eslint-plugin-crank, @b9g/crank
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish38

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

84Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .eslintrc.json, eslint.config.js
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 7 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://crank.js.org
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 7 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsjsx, components, framework, generators, promises, crank, javascript
has_wikino
homepagehttps://crank.js.org
docs_sitehttps://crank.js.org
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

46Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2/2.5CI-Tests — 7 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 1/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 6 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 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
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 — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 90 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate4.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection. 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.

63Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
37.3/40Legible commit history — 70 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.7
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .eslintrc.json, eslint.config.js
11/11Static type checking — packages/crank-codemods/tsconfig.json, packages/crankdown/tsconfig.json, packages/eslint-plugin-crank/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json, website/tsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 96 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configspackages/crank-codemods/tsconfig.json, packages/crankdown/tsconfig.json, packages/eslint-plugin-crank/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json, website/tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0.96
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
54.7/55Manageable file sizes — 1/161 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes108,913
source_files_sampled161
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

2,798GitHub stars
25contributors
414commits, last 12 months
10days since last push
7releases
1bus factor
24open issues
npmpackage 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 ★ / 83 ⇿
0Stars
83Forks
7Releases

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.

1325385063758883212020-042023-072026-09
Major 0Minor 1Patch 6

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.6 / 10
4.6aggregate

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 · 2026-10-13 02:00 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
8CI-Tests7 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 1/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 6 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 3 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
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities90 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 39
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@b9g/assets^0.2.1website/package.json
npm@b9g/crank^0.7.6website/package.json
npm@b9g/crankdownfile:../packages/crankdownwebsite/package.json
npm@b9g/platform^0.1.17website/package.json
npm@b9g/platform-bun^0.1.16website/package.json
npm@b9g/revise^0.1.3website/package.json
npm@b9g/router^0.2.5website/package.json
npm@b9g/shovel^0.2.20website/package.json
npm@emotion/css^11.13.5website/package.json
npm@emotion/server^11.11.0website/package.json
npm@lezer/javascript^1.5.4website/package.json
npm@sveltejs/acorn-typescript^1.0.8website/package.json
npm@tanstack/virtual-core^3.13.12website/package.json
npm@types/estree^1.0.8website/package.json
npm@types/lz-string^1.5.0website/package.json
npm@types/node^18.19.130website/package.json
npm@types/postcss-nested^4.2.3website/package.json
npm@types/postcss-preset-env^7.7.0website/package.json
npm@types/prismjs^1.26.5website/package.json
npmacorn^8.15.0website/package.json
npmacorn-jsx^5.3.2website/package.json
npmastring^1.9.0website/package.json
npmfront-matter^4.0.2website/package.json
npmgh-pages^6.3.0website/package.json
npmjscodeshift^17.3.0website/package.json
npmlz-string^1.5.0website/package.json
npmmarked^18.0.0website/package.json
npmnormalize.css^8.0.1website/package.json
npmpagefind^1.4.0website/package.json
npmpostcss-nested^6.2.0website/package.json
npmpostcss-preset-env^8.5.1website/package.json
npmprism-themes^1.9.0website/package.json
npmprismjs^1.30.0website/package.json
npmserialize-javascript^7.0.3website/package.json
npmsvg-to-ico^1.0.17website/package.json
npmtruncate-html^1.2.2website/package.json
npmtypescript^4.9.5website/package.json
npm@b9g/crankfile:../../packages/crank-codemods/package.json
npmjscodeshift^17.0.0packages/crank-codemods/package.json
All dependencies 63

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 42 direct and 21 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@b9g/assets^0.2.1direct
npm@b9g/crank^0.7.6direct
npm@b9g/platform^0.1.17direct
npm@b9g/platform-bun^0.1.16direct
npm@b9g/revise^0.1.3direct
npm@b9g/router^0.2.5direct
npm@b9g/shovel^0.2.20direct
npm@emotion/css^11.13.5direct
npm@emotion/server^11.11.0direct
npm@lezer/javascript^1.5.4direct
npm@sveltejs/acorn-typescript^1.0.8direct
npm@tanstack/virtual-core^3.13.12direct
npm@types/estree^1.0.8direct
npm@types/lz-string^1.5.0direct
npm@types/node^18.19.130direct
npm@types/node^20.0.0direct
npm@types/node^22.14.0direct
npm@types/postcss-nested^4.2.3direct
npm@types/postcss-preset-env^7.7.0direct
npm@types/prismjs^1.26.5direct
npmacorn^8.15.0direct
npmacorn-jsx^5.3.2direct
npmastring^1.9.0direct
npmfront-matter^4.0.2direct
npmgh-pages^6.3.0direct
npmjscodeshift^17.0.0direct
npmjscodeshift^17.3.0direct
npmlz-string^1.5.0direct
npmmarked^18.0.0direct
npmnormalize.css^8.0.1direct
npmpagefind^1.4.0direct
npmpostcss-nested^6.2.0direct
npmpostcss-preset-env^8.5.1direct
npmprism-themes^1.9.0direct
npmprismjs^1.30.0direct
npmserialize-javascript^7.0.3direct
npmsvg-to-ico^1.0.17direct
npmtruncate-html^1.2.2direct
npmtypescript^4.9.5direct
npmtypescript^5.0.0direct
npmtypescript^5.8.3direct
npmtypescript^5.9.3direct
npm@b9g/libuild^0.2.20indirect
npm@b9g/skillpack^0.1.6indirect
npm@eslint/js^9.37.0indirect
npm@playwright/test^1.57.0indirect
npm@tsconfig/recommended^1.0.10indirect
npm@types/jscodeshift^0.12.0indirect
npm@types/serialize-javascript^5.0.4indirect
npm@types/sinon^17.0.4indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/eslint-plugin^8.29.1indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/parser^8.29.1indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/parser^8.46.1indirect
npmeslint^8.57.1indirect
npmeslint^9.37.0indirect
npmeslint-config-prettier^9.1.0indirect
npmeslint-plugin-prettier^5.2.6indirect
npmeslint-plugin-react^7.37.5indirect
npmplaywright^1.57.0indirect
npmplaywright^1.62.1indirect
npmprettier^3.5.3indirect
npmsinon^17.0.2indirect
npmtypescript-eslint^8.46.0indirect
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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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