Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-12 15:56 UTC

buxlabs / boxwood

Server side templating engine written in JavaScript

JavaScriptMIT★ 135 stars⑂ 6 forkssince Mar 2018View on GitHub ↗

buxlabs/boxwood holds a health index of 63 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (82/100) and lowest on Vitality (46/100). It was last updated 3 days 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

buxlabsOrganization
5 followers11 public repossince May 2016

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npmboxwood2.20.01,9411533 days agohtmlenginejavascript

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

46Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 3 days ago
11.8/36Commit cadence — 17/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 126 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year126
human_commit_share0.97
days_since_last_push3
active_weeks_last_year17
How it's scored
0/27Ships releases — no releases published
0/36Release recency — no releases
0/27Release cadence — no releases
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count0
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?

47Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
34.5/60Stars — 135 stars
5.8/25Forks — 6 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks6
stars135
watchers1
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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_badges2
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
43.8/80Monthly downloads — 1,941 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesboxwood
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads1,941
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 factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 80% of commits
6.8/13.5Contributor breadth — 5 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled5
top_contributor_share0.802
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
28.9/30PR acceptance — 133/138 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_prs133
open_issues0
closed_issues566
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs5
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
5.6/25Owner reach — 5 followers of buxlabs
19.9/25Track record — 11 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers5
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginbuxlabs
public_repos11
account_age_days3,767

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 3 days ago
20/20Version history — 153 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesboxwood
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish3

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

82Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — package.json ("prettier", "standard")
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_configyes
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 1 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsjavascript
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

60Moderate · 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
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 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
1.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages12
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the npm:boxwood@2.20.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 12 packages. 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.

55Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — .github/copilot-instructions.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — 0 of 97 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0
agent_instruction_files.github/copilot-instructions.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes1,332
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — package.json ("prettier", "standard")
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
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 code — JavaScript without a type-check config
54.9/55Manageable file sizes — 1/427 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes107,356
source_files_sampled427
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 — example
Inputs used
example_dirsexample
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

135GitHub stars
5contributors
126commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
0releases
1bus factor
0open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Star history carried forward from 2026-07-21: GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository admins, so it can no longer be collected. The repository has 135 stars today.

More detail

Star and fork history 135 ★ / 6 ⇿
135Stars
6Forks

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.

Star history is shown as collected on 2026-07-21. GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository administrators in July 2026, so this series can no longer be extended; the current star total above remains live.

02550751001251501356902018-052022-062026-07

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.0 / 10
5.0aggregate

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 · 2026-09-12 15:55 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
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate 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
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
3Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
0SASTno SAST tool detected
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 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmabstract-syntax-tree^2.25.0package.json
npmcss-tree^3.2.1package.json
All dependencies 126

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 124 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmabstract-syntax-tree2.25.0direct
npmcss-tree3.2.1direct
npm@asamuzakjp/css-color5.1.11indirect
npm@asamuzakjp/dom-selector7.1.1indirect
npm@asamuzakjp/generational-cache1.0.1indirect
npm@asamuzakjp/nwsapi2.3.9indirect
npm@bramus/specificity2.4.2indirect
npm@csstools/color-helpers6.0.2indirect
npm@csstools/css-calc3.2.1indirect
npm@csstools/css-color-parser4.1.1indirect
npm@csstools/css-parser-algorithms4.0.0indirect
npm@csstools/css-syntax-patches-for-csstree1.1.4indirect
npm@csstools/css-tokenizer4.0.0indirect
npm@exodus/bytes1.15.1indirect
npmaccepts2.0.0indirect
npmast-types0.14.2indirect
npmastring1.9.0indirect
npmbenchmark2.1.4indirect
npmbidi-js1.0.3indirect
npmbody-parser2.3.0indirect
npmbytes3.1.2indirect
npmcall-bind-apply-helpers1.0.2indirect
npmcall-bound1.0.4indirect
npmcontent-disposition1.0.0indirect
npmcontent-type1.0.5indirect
npmcontent-type2.0.0indirect
npmcookie0.7.2indirect
npmcookie-signature1.2.2indirect
npmdata-urls7.0.0indirect
npmdebug4.4.3indirect
npmdecimal.js10.6.0indirect
npmdepd2.0.0indirect
npmdunder-proto1.0.1indirect
npmee-first1.1.1indirect
npmencodeurl2.0.0indirect
npmentities8.0.0indirect
npmes-define-property1.0.1indirect
npmes-errors1.3.0indirect
npmes-object-atoms1.1.2indirect
npmescape-html1.0.3indirect
npmesquery1.7.0indirect
npmestraverse5.3.0indirect
npmetag1.8.1indirect
npmexpress5.2.1indirect
npmfinalhandler2.1.0indirect
npmforwarded0.2.0indirect
npmfresh2.0.0indirect
npmfunction-bind1.1.2indirect
npmget-intrinsic1.3.0indirect
npmget-proto1.0.1indirect
npmgopd1.2.0indirect
npmhandlebars4.7.9indirect
npmhas-symbols1.1.0indirect
npmhasown2.0.4indirect
npmhtml-encoding-sniffer6.0.0indirect
npmhttp-errors2.0.1indirect
npmiconv-lite0.7.3indirect
npminherits2.0.4indirect
npmipaddr.js1.9.1indirect
npmis-potential-custom-element-name1.0.1indirect
npmis-promise4.0.0indirect
npmjsdom29.1.1indirect
npmlodash4.18.1indirect
npmlru-cache11.5.1indirect
npmmath-intrinsics1.1.0indirect
npmmdn-data2.27.1indirect
npmmedia-typer1.1.0indirect
npmmerge-descriptors2.0.0indirect
npmmeriyah7.2.0indirect
npmmime-db1.54.0indirect
npmmime-types3.0.1indirect
npmminimist1.2.6indirect
npmms2.1.3indirect
npmmustache4.2.0indirect
npmnegotiator1.0.0indirect
npmneo-async2.6.2indirect
npmobject-inspect1.13.4indirect
npmon-finished2.4.1indirect
npmonce1.4.0indirect
npmparse58.0.1indirect
npmparseurl1.3.3indirect
npmpath-to-regexp8.4.2indirect
npmplatform1.3.6indirect
npmproxy-addr2.0.7indirect
npmpunycode2.3.1indirect
npmpure-conditions1.2.3indirect
npmqs6.16.0indirect
npmrange-parser1.2.1indirect
npmraw-body3.0.2indirect
npmrequire-from-string2.0.2indirect
npmrouter2.2.0indirect
npmsafe-buffer5.2.1indirect
npmsafer-buffer2.1.2indirect
npmsaxes6.0.0indirect
npmsend1.2.0indirect
npmserve-static2.2.0indirect
npmsetprototypeof1.2.0indirect
npmside-channel1.1.1indirect
npmside-channel-list1.0.1indirect
npmside-channel-map1.0.1indirect
npmside-channel-weakmap1.0.2indirect
npmsource-map0.6.1indirect
npmsource-map0.8.0indirect
npmsource-map-js1.2.1indirect
npmstatuses2.0.2indirect
npmsymbol-tree3.2.4indirect
npmtldts7.4.2indirect
npmtldts-core7.4.2indirect
npmtoidentifier1.0.1indirect
npmtough-cookie6.0.1indirect
npmtr466.0.0indirect
npmtslib2.8.1indirect
npmtype-is2.1.0indirect
npmuglify-js3.12.6indirect
npmunderscore1.13.8indirect
npmundici7.29.1indirect
npmunpipe1.0.0indirect
npmvary1.1.2indirect
npmw3c-xmlserializer5.0.0indirect
npmwebidl-conversions8.0.1indirect
npmwhatwg-mimetype5.0.0indirect
npmwhatwg-url16.0.1indirect
npmwordwrap1.0.0indirect
npmwrappy1.0.2indirect
npmxml-name-validator5.0.0indirect
npmxmlchars2.2.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing npm:boxwood@2.20.0 pulls in 12 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

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 statistics — npm.