Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-27 17:27 UTC

bitsandbytes-foundation / bitsandbytes

Accessible large language models via k-bit quantization for PyTorch.

Python · CudaMIT★ 8,442 stars⑂ 916 forkssince Jun 2021View on GitHub ↗

bitsandbytes-foundation/bitsandbytes holds a health index of 96 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (92/100) and lowest on Security (68/100). It was last updated today. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

96
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

96
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 84 is calibrated to 96 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

117 followers3 public repossince Jul 2024

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIbitsandbytes0.50.25,633,748620 days agogpuoptimizersoptimization8-bitquantizationcompression

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 0 days ago
30.5/36Commit cadence44/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume242 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 15 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year242
human_commit_share0.95
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year44
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases36 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~36.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count36
latest_release_tag0.50.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases36.7

Community & Adoption

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

92Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
60/60Stars8,442 stars
24.7/25Forks916 forks
9.5/15Watchers52 watchers
Inputs used
forks916
stars8,442
watchers52
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads5,633,748 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesbitsandbytes
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads5,633,748
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?

75Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15.9/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 29% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth99 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 31 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled99
top_contributor_share0.294
How it's scored
40.7/42Issue resolution97% of issues closed
21.4/30PR acceptance505/707 decided PRs merged
9.3/13Newcomer PR acceptance5/7 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 11/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs505
open_issues39
closed_issues1,197
prs_merged_7d5
prs_decided_7d6
prs_merged_30d13
prs_decided_30d15
issue_closed_ratio0.968
closed_unmerged_prs202
first_time_authors_30d6
first_time_prs_merged_30d5
first_time_prs_decided_30d7
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
14.9/25Owner reach117 followers of bitsandbytes-foundation
8.6/25Track record3 public repos, account ~2 yr old
Inputs used
followers117
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginbitsandbytes-foundation
public_repos3
account_age_days778

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history62 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesbitsandbytes
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

92Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows8 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configpyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
14/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests14 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://huggingface.co/docs/bitsandbytes/main/en/index
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsllm, machine-learning, pytorch, qlora, quantization
has_wikino
homepagehttps://huggingface.co/docs/bitsandbytes/main/en/index
docs_sitehttps://huggingface.co/docs/bitsandbytes/main/en/index
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

68Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0.8/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
1.8/2.5CI-Tests14 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3/7.5Code-ReviewFound 11/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 31 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 15 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
2.5/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate6

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages2
unassessed_packages13
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 2 resolved dependencies against OSV. 13 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.

79Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsCLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history86 of 95 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.905
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes3,421
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configpyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checkingbitsandbytes/py.typed
0/10Reproducible environment
10/10Demonstrated agent practice19 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance5 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsbitsandbytes/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.19
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.05
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codePython with type-check config (bitsandbytes/py.typed)
54.4/55Manageable file sizes1/87 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes65,287
source_files_sampled87
oversized_source_files1
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

8,442GitHub stars
99contributors
242commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
36releases
3bus factor
39open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:bitsandbytes@0.50.2; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 916 ⇿
0Stars
916Forks
34Releases

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.

02004006008001,000818182022-072024-082026-08
Major 0Minor 17Patch 16

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.0 / 10
6.0aggregate

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 · 2026-08-27 17:27 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
1Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
7CI-Tests14 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4Code-ReviewFound 11/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
10Contributorsproject has 31 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 15 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPItorch>=2.4,<3pyproject.toml
PyPInumpy>=1.17pyproject.toml
PyPIpackaging>=20.9pyproject.toml
All dependencies 15

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 12 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPInumpydirect
PyPIpackagingdirect
PyPItorchdirect
PyPIbuildindirect
PyPIeinopsindirect
PyPIhf-doc-builder0.5.0indirect
PyPIlion-pytorch0.2.3indirect
PyPIpre-commitindirect
PyPIpytestindirect
PyPIruffindirect
PyPIscipyindirect
PyPIsetuptoolsindirect
PyPItransformersindirect
PyPItrove-classifiersindirect
PyPIwheelindirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 2 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 13 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

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 statisticsPyPI.