Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-20 13:11 UTC

boringSQL / regresql

Catch broken queries and performance regressions before production. SQL regression testing, EXPLAIN plan baselines, and CI/CD integration for PostgreSQL.

GoBSD-2-Clause★ 395 stars⑂ 8 forkssince Oct 2025forkView on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

boringSQL/regresql holds a health index of 57 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (75/100) and lowest on Security (36/100). It was last updated 15 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

57
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.

57
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 55 is calibrated to 57 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

boringSQL Organization
31 followers18 public repossince Oct 2023

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Gogithub.com/boringsql/regresql/v2v2.0.0-899 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

74Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 15 days ago
22.2/36Commit cadence — 32/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 192 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 20 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year192
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push15
active_weeks_last_year32
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 1 releases published
27/36Release recency — latest release 99 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — cadence unknown (single release)
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count1
latest_release_tagv2.0.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release99
mean_days_between_releases—

Community & Adoption

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

38Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
42.1/60Stars — 395 stars
7/25Forks — 8 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks8
stars395
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
0/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (BSD-2-Clause)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeno
has_licenseno
readme_badges0
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?

55Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.8/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 92% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 4 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.92
How it's scored
25.2/42Issue resolution — 60% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance — 1/1 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_prs1
open_issues2
closed_issues3
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.6
closed_unmerged_prs0
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
10.8/25Owner reach — 31 followers of boringSQL
15.3/25Track record — 18 public repos, account ~3 yr old
Inputs used
followers31
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginboringSQL
public_repos18
account_age_days1,101

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 99 days ago
20/20Version history — 8 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/boringsql/regresql/v2
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish99

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

60Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
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_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
0/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://boringsql.com/products/regresql/
0/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 11 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspostgresql, ci-cd, cli, database-testing, explain-plan, golang, performance-testing, query-performance, regression-testing, snapshot-testing, sql-testing
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://boringsql.com/products/regresql/
docs_sitehttps://boringsql.com/products/regresql/
has_readmeno
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionno

Security

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

36Weak · 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
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 20 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
3/7.5Vulnerabilities — 6 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate3.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
7.6/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: github.com/jackc/pgx/v5 v5.8.0 (critical 9.8)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
32.1/40No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 195 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories9
affected_packages3
assessed_packages17
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitycritical 1, unknown 2
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 17 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

75Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://boringsql.com/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 100 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://boringsql.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile, pg_ext/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 16 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
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile, pg_ext/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.16
toolchain_manifestsexamples/sqlc-tutorial/go.mod, go.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/81 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes24,331
source_files_sampled81
oversized_source_files0
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

395GitHub stars
4contributors
192commits, last 12 months
15days since last push
1releases
1bus factor
2open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Community profile unavailable

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 8 ⇿
0Stars
8Forks

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.

2345678822025-112025-112025-12
OpenSSF Scorecard 3.2 / 10
3.2aggregate

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 · 2026-10-20 13:11 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
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained20 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTno SAST tool detected
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
4Vulnerabilities6 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 7
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/boringsql/queriesv1.6.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/jackc/pgx/v5v5.8.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/mndrix/tap-gov0.0.0-20171203230836-629fa407e90bgo.mod
Gogithub.com/pmezard/go-difflibv1.0.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/termv0.39.0go.mod
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1go.mod
All dependencies 17

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 10 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/boringsql/queriesv1.6.1direct
Gogithub.com/jackc/pgx/v5v5.8.0direct
Gogithub.com/mndrix/tap-gov0.0.0-20171203230836-629fa407e90bdirect
Gogithub.com/pmezard/go-difflibv1.0.0direct
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2direct
Gogolang.org/x/termv0.39.0direct
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1direct
Gogithub.com/inconshreveable/mousetrapv1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/jackc/pgpassfilev1.0.0indirect
Gogithub.com/jackc/pgservicefilev0.0.0-20240606120523-5a60cdf6a761indirect
Gogithub.com/jackc/puddle/v2v2.2.2indirect
Gogithub.com/kr/prettyv0.3.1indirect
Gogithub.com/spf13/pflagv1.0.10indirect
Gogolang.org/x/syncv0.17.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.40.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/textv0.30.0indirect
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v2v2.4.0indirect
Dependency advisories 3

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 17 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 3 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
github.com/jackc/pgx/v5v5.8.0directcritical65.9.2
golang.org/x/sysv0.40.0indirectunknown10.44.0
golang.org/x/textv0.30.0indirectunknown20.41.0

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 statistics — Go.