Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-23 21:25 UTC

clarin-eric / harvest-manager

A simple Java application for managing an OAI-PMH harvesting workflow

JavaCustom license★ 14 stars⑂ 12 forkssince Mar 2014View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryApplicationhow this is determined

clarin-eric/harvest-manager holds a health index of 53 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (60/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (38/100). It was last updated 41 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

53
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.

53
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 52 is calibrated to 53 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

CLARIN ERICOrganization
44 followers149 public repossince Jul 2014

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

53Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 41 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence8/52 weeks with commits
12.7/18Commit volume25 commits in the last year
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
commits_last_year25
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push41
active_weeks_last_year8
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases15 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 42 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~254.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count15
latest_release_tag2.0-RC7
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release42
mean_days_between_releases254.8

Community & Adoption

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

38Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
18.1/60Stars14 stars
8.7/25Forks12 forks
5/15Watchers9 watchers
Inputs used
forks12
stars14
watchers9
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_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?

60Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
13.5/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 40% of commits
10.8/13.5Contributor breadth8 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled8
top_contributor_share0.401
How it's scored
15.1/42Issue resolution36% of issues closed
27.8/30PR acceptance25/27 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 5/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs25
open_issues16
closed_issues9
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.36
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
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
11.9/25Owner reach44 followers of clarin-eric
25/25Track record149 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers44
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginclarin-eric
public_repos149
account_age_days4,432

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

60Moderate · 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
12/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests4 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
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
10/10Topics3 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscmdi, oai-pmh, vlo
has_wikiyes
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?

49Weak · 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
1.5/2.5CI-Tests4 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 5/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
1.5/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
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-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
6.8/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6/7.5Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate4.3
How it's scored
19.6/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories1 affected: com.google.guava:guava 31.0.1-jre (moderate 5.5)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
35.2/40No advisories left outstanding1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 1,977 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories2
affected_packages1
assessed_packages30
unassessed_packages2
affected_by_severitymoderate 1
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 30 resolved dependencies against OSV. 2 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.

46Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
5.3/40Legible commit history10 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.1
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrappom.xml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingJava (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile, lockfile
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_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestspom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeJava (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/83 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJava
largest_source_bytes39,567
source_files_sampled83
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

14GitHub stars
8contributors
25commits, last 12 months
41days since last push
15releases
2bus factor
16open issues
Mavenpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch maven package 'nl.mpi:harvest-manager' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 12 ⇿
0Stars
12Forks
9Releases

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.

0246810121112015-092019-082023-06
Major 0Minor 2Patch 6

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.3 / 10
4.3aggregate

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 · 2026-08-23 21:25 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
6CI-Tests4 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 5/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
2Maintained0 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
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
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 19
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Mavenorg.glassfish.jaxb:codemodel3.0.0-M4pom.xml
Mavenorg.glassfish.jaxb:txw23.0.0-M4pom.xml
Mavencom.sun.xsom:xsom20140925pom.xml
Mavencom.sun.istack:istack-commons-runtime4.0.0-M3pom.xml
Mavencom.sun.xml.bind.external:rngom3.0.0-M4pom.xml
Mavenorg.apache.logging.log4j:log4j-slf4j-impl2.24.3pom.xml
Mavenorg.slf4j:log4j-over-slf4j1.7.32pom.xml
Mavencom.joyent.util:fast-md52.7.1pom.xml
Mavennl.mpi.tla:SaxonUtils2.0-RC7-SNAPSHOTpom.xml
Mavenjoda-time:joda-time2.10.6pom.xml
Mavencommons-io:commons-io2.14.0pom.xml
Mavenorg.codehaus.woodstox:woodstox-core-asl4.4.1pom.xml
Mavencom.jayway.jsonpath:json-path2.9.0pom.xml
Mavennet.minidev:json-smart2.5.2pom.xml
Mavencom.google.guava:guava31.0.1-jrepom.xml
Mavenjavax.annotation:javax.annotation-api1.3.2pom.xml
Mavenjavax.xml.bind:jaxb-api2.4.0-b180725.0427pom.xml
Mavenorg.glassfish.jaxb:jaxb-runtime2.4.0-b180830.0438pom.xml
Mavenorg.eclipse.rdf4j:rdf4j-bom4.0.2pom.xml
All dependencies 32

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 19 direct and 13 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavencom.google.guava:guava31.0.1-jredirect
Mavencom.jayway.jsonpath:json-path2.9.0direct
Mavencom.joyent.util:fast-md52.7.1direct
Mavencom.sun.istack:istack-commons-runtime4.0.0-M3direct
Mavencom.sun.xml.bind.external:rngom3.0.0-M4direct
Mavencom.sun.xsom:xsom20140925direct
Mavencommons-io:commons-io2.14.0direct
Mavenjavax.annotation:javax.annotation-api1.3.2direct
Mavenjavax.xml.bind:jaxb-api2.4.0-b180725.0427direct
Mavenjoda-time:joda-time2.10.6direct
Mavennet.minidev:json-smart2.5.2direct
Mavennl.mpi.tla:SaxonUtils2.0-RC7-SNAPSHOTdirect
Mavenorg.apache.logging.log4j:log4j-slf4j-impl2.24.3direct
Mavenorg.codehaus.woodstox:woodstox-core-asl4.4.1direct
Mavenorg.eclipse.rdf4j:rdf4j-bom4.0.2direct
Mavenorg.glassfish.jaxb:codemodel3.0.0-M4direct
Mavenorg.glassfish.jaxb:jaxb-runtime2.4.0-b180830.0438direct
Mavenorg.glassfish.jaxb:txw23.0.0-M4direct
Mavenorg.slf4j:log4j-over-slf4j1.7.32direct
Mavenjunit:junit4.13.2indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-assembly-plugin3.3.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin3.8.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-dependency-pluginindirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-enforcer-plugin3.0.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-jar-plugin3.3.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-javadoc-plugin3.2.0indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.mojo:buildnumber-maven-plugin1.4indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.mojo:findbugs-maven-plugin3.0.5indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.mojo:jaxb2-maven-plugin2.5.0indirect
Mavenorg.mockito:mockito-core3.4.6indirect
Mavenorg.wiremock:wiremock-standalone3.13.2indirect
PyPIplumbumindirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 30 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct. 2 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
com.google.guava:guava31.0.1-jredirectmoderate232.0.0-android

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.