Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-17 03:21 UTC

carderne / signal-export

Export your Signal chats to markdown files with attachments

PythonCustom license★ 780 stars⑂ 88 forkssince May 2019View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

carderne/signal-export holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (82/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (34/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

71
overall / 100
Good

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.

71
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 63 is calibrated to 71 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Chris ArdernePersonal account
168 followers154 public repossince Jun 2016

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIsignal-export3.9.12,363717 days agobackupchatexport

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

82Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 4 days ago
10.4/36Commit cadence15/52 weeks with commits
13.1/18Commit volume28 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained18 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year28
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year15

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases59 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 7 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~39.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count59
latest_release_tagv3.9.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release7
mean_days_between_releases39.1
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?

57Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
46.9/60Stars780 stars
16.2/25Forks88 forks
6.2/15Watchers14 watchers
Inputs used
forks88
stars780
watchers14
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5Licenselicense file present, not a recognized license
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges1
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesbadge.fury.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
45/80Monthly downloads2,363 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagessignal-export
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads2,363
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?

69Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
5/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 78% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth46 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled46
top_contributor_share0.776
How it's scored
39/42Issue resolution93% of issues closed
27.6/30PR acceptance70/76 decided PRs merged
11.4/13Newcomer PR acceptance14/16 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
13.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 27/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
merged_prs70
open_issues11
closed_issues143
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d14
prs_decided_30d16
issue_closed_ratio0.929
closed_unmerged_prs6
first_time_authors_30d7
first_time_prs_merged_30d14
first_time_prs_decided_30d16
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
16/25Owner reach168 followers of carderne
25/25Track record154 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers168
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_logincarderne
public_repos154
account_age_days3,721
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 7 days ago
20/20Version history71 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagessignal-export
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish7

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

49Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsbackup, signal, sqlite, chat, export
has_wikino
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

62Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 27/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
1.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained18 commit(s) and 3 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
3.8/7.5Vulnerabilities5 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate5.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages15
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 pypi:signal-export@3.9.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 15 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.

34At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
26.1/40Legible commit history49 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.49
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/25 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes12,283
source_files_sampled25
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

780GitHub stars
46contributors
28commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
59releases
1bus factor
11open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 88 ⇿
0Stars
88Forks
58Releases

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.

0204060801008732020-112023-092026-08
Major 2Minor 17Patch 36

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.2 / 10
5.2aggregate

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 · 2026-08-17 03:20 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
9Code-ReviewFound 27/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained18 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
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
5Vulnerabilities5 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 7
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIbeautifulsoup4~=4.11pyproject.toml
PyPIemoji~=2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIMarkdown>=3.8.1,<4pyproject.toml
PyPItyper>=0.12.1pyproject.toml
PyPIpycryptodome~=3.20pyproject.toml
PyPIsqlcipher3-wheels>=0.5.4pyproject.toml
PyPIfiletype>=1.2.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 32

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 25 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIbeautifulsoup44.14.3direct
PyPIemoji2.15.0direct
PyPIfiletype1.2.0direct
PyPImarkdown3.10.2direct
PyPIpycryptodome3.23.0direct
PyPIsqlcipher3-wheels0.5.7direct
PyPItyper0.24.1direct
PyPIannotated-doc0.0.4indirect
PyPIclick8.3.1indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverage7.13.4indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.0.0indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPIpackaging26.0indirect
PyPIpastel0.2.1indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpoethepoet0.42.1indirect
PyPIpygments2.19.2indirect
PyPIpytest9.0.2indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.0.0indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIrich14.3.3indirect
PyPIruff0.15.6indirect
PyPIshellingham1.5.4indirect
PyPIsoupsieve2.8.3indirect
PyPItomli2.4.0indirect
PyPIty0.0.60indirect
PyPItypes-emoji2.1.0.3indirect
PyPItypes-markdown3.10.2.20260211indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:signal-export@3.9.1 pulls in 15 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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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