Public record
Software health reportschema 0.29.0 · metrics 2.5.0 · 2026-08-02 22:23 UTC

casey / boilerplate

A statically-checked Rust Template Engine

RustCC0-1.0★ 81 stars⑂ 7 forkssince Aug 2022View on GitHub ↗

casey/boilerplate holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (72/100) and lowest on Security (55/100). It was last updated today. 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

Casey RodarmorPersonal account
3,717 followers310 public repossince Mar 2008

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
crates.ioboilerplate1.2.26,833170 days agono-stdtemplate-engine

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

72Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
4.2/36Commit cadence — 6/52 weeks with commits
13.5/18Commit volume — 31 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 13 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year31
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year6
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 1 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — cadence unknown (single release)
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count1
latest_release_tag1.2.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases
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?

55Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
30.9/60Stars — 81 stars
6.5/25Forks — 7 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks7
stars81
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (CC0-1.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges3
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
51.1/80Monthly downloads — 6,833 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesboilerplate
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads146,183
monthly_downloads6,833
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?

63Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 99% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.986
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
29.2/30PR acceptance — 71/73 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_prs71
open_issues0
closed_issues7
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs2
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
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
25/25Owner reach — 3,717 followers of casey
25/25Track record — 310 public repos, account ~18 yr old
Inputs used
followers3,717
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_logincasey
public_repos310
account_age_days6,727
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 17 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesboilerplate
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

65Good · 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
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 2 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsrust, template-engine
has_wikiyes
homepage
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

55Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
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
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
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 — 13 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 — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
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_aggregate4.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): branch_protection, 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
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages64
unassessed_packages8
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 64 resolved dependencies against OSV. 8 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.

60Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 70 of 72 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
legible_history_share0.972
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — justfile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Rust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 72
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
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesjustfile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, crates/boilerplate-macros/Cargo.toml, crates/boilerplate-parser/Cargo.toml, crates/boilerplate-tests/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/16 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes21,362
source_files_sampled16
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

81GitHub stars
2contributors
31commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
1releases
1bus factor
0open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index crates:boilerplate@1.2.2; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 7 ⇿
0Stars
7Forks

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.

1234567712022-082024-032025-11

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.4 / 10
4.4aggregate

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 · 2026-08-02 22:23 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
10CI-Tests29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained13 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
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
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
crates.ioboilerplate-macros0.0.4Cargo.toml
crates.ioboilerplate-parser0.0.1Cargo.toml
All dependencies 72

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 71 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioboilerplate-parserdirect
crates.ioatomic-waker1.1.2indirect
crates.ioaxum0.8.9indirect
crates.ioaxum-core0.5.6indirect
crates.iobytes1.12.1indirect
crates.iodarlingindirect
crates.iodarling0.23.0indirect
crates.iodarling_core0.23.0indirect
crates.iodarling_macro0.23.0indirect
crates.iodiff0.1.13indirect
crates.ioform_urlencoded1.2.2indirect
crates.iofutures-channel0.3.33indirect
crates.iofutures-core0.3.33indirect
crates.iofutures-task0.3.33indirect
crates.iofutures-util0.3.33indirect
crates.iohttp1.5.0indirect
crates.iohttp-body1.1.0indirect
crates.iohttp-body-util0.1.4indirect
crates.iohttparse1.10.1indirect
crates.iohttpdate1.0.3indirect
crates.iohyper1.11.0indirect
crates.iohyper-util0.1.20indirect
crates.ioident_case1.0.1indirect
crates.ioitoa1.0.18indirect
crates.iolibc0.2.189indirect
crates.iolog0.4.33indirect
crates.iomatchit0.8.4indirect
crates.iomemchr2.8.3indirect
crates.iomimeindirect
crates.iomime0.3.17indirect
crates.iomio1.2.2indirect
crates.ionew_mime_guessindirect
crates.ionew_mime_guess4.0.4indirect
crates.ioonce_cell1.21.4indirect
crates.iopercent-encoding2.3.2indirect
crates.iopin-project-lite0.2.17indirect
crates.iopretty_assertions1.4.1indirect
crates.ioproc-macro2indirect
crates.ioproc-macro21.0.107indirect
crates.ioquoteindirect
crates.ioquote1.0.47indirect
crates.ioryu1.0.23indirect
crates.ioserde1.0.229indirect
crates.ioserde_core1.0.229indirect
crates.ioserde_derive1.0.229indirect
crates.ioserde_json1.0.151indirect
crates.ioserde_path_to_error0.1.20indirect
crates.ioserde_urlencoded0.7.1indirect
crates.ioslab0.4.12indirect
crates.iosmallvec1.15.2indirect
crates.iosocket20.6.5indirect
crates.iostrsim0.11.1indirect
crates.iosynindirect
crates.iosyn2.0.119indirect
crates.iosyn3.0.3indirect
crates.iosync_wrapper1.0.2indirect
crates.iotokio1.53.1indirect
crates.iotokio-macros2.7.2indirect
crates.iotower0.5.3indirect
crates.iotower-layer0.3.3indirect
crates.iotower-service0.3.3indirect
crates.iotracing0.1.44indirect
crates.iotracing-core0.1.36indirect
crates.iounicase2.9.0indirect
crates.iounicode-ident1.0.24indirect
crates.iounindentindirect
crates.iounindent0.2.4indirect
crates.iowasi0.11.1+wasi-snapshot-preview1indirect
crates.iowindows-link0.2.1indirect
crates.iowindows-sys0.61.2indirect
crates.ioyansi1.0.1indirect
crates.iozmij1.0.23indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 64 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 8 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

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 v2.5.0, schema v0.29.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticscrates.io.