Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-13 22:12 UTC

code-and-effect / effective_pages

Content pages, bootstrap3 menu builder and page-specific header tag helpers for your Rails app

Ruby · HamlMIT★ 5 stars⑂ 1 forksince Dec 2014View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined

code-and-effect/effective_pages holds a health index of 54 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (68/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (32/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

54
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.

54
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 53 is calibrated to 54 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Code and EffectOrganization
4 followers49 public repossince Jun 2013

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemseffective_pages3.16.1-1320 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

63Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
3.5/36Commit cadence5/52 weeks with commits
10.8/18Commit volume15 commits in the last year
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
commits_last_year15
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year5
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases100 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~52.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag3.16.1
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases52.9
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?

40Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
9.8/60Stars5 stars
0/25Forks1 forks
3.9/15Watchers6 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars5
watchers6
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
54.9/80Total downloads192,257 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageseffective_pages
dependents
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads192,257
monthly_downloads
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?

68Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3.2/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 86% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth4 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.86
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance44/44 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 1/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs44
open_issues0
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio1
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 backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
5/25Owner reach4 followers of code-and-effect
24.4/25Track record49 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers4
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_logincode-and-effect
public_repos49
account_age_days4,802
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 rubygems
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history132 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageseffective_pages
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

50Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests3 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_cino
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
10/10Topics1 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsrails
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?

38Weak · 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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests3 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 1/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0.8/7.5Maintained2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
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
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
0/7.5Vulnerabilities68 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate2.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories68
affected_packages19
assessed_packages114
unassessed_packages11
affected_by_severitycritical 2, high 8, moderate 6, low 3
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 114 resolved dependencies against OSV. 11 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.

32At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
7.5/40Legible commit history14 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.14
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
6/10Demonstrated agent practice3 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.03
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeRuby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/95 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes15,361
source_files_sampled95
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

5GitHub stars
4contributors
15commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
0open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 2.2 / 10
2.2aggregate

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 · 2026-08-13 22:12 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests3 out of 3 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 1/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
1Maintained2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
0Vulnerabilities68 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 125

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 125 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsaction_text-trix2.1.16indirect
RubyGemsactioncable8.1.2indirect
RubyGemsactionmailbox8.1.2indirect
RubyGemsactionmailer8.1.2indirect
RubyGemsactionpack8.1.2indirect
RubyGemsactiontext8.1.2indirect
RubyGemsactionview8.1.2indirect
RubyGemsactivejob8.1.2indirect
RubyGemsactivemodel8.1.2indirect
RubyGemsactiverecord8.1.2indirect
RubyGemsactivestorage8.1.2indirect
RubyGemsactivesupport8.1.2indirect
RubyGemsaddressable2.8.9indirect
RubyGemsansi1.5.0indirect
RubyGemsautoprefixer-rails10.4.21.0indirect
RubyGemsbase640.3.0indirect
RubyGemsbcrypt3.1.21indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal4.0.1indirect
RubyGemsbootstrap4.6.2.1indirect
RubyGemsbuilder3.3.0indirect
RubyGemsbyebug13.0.0indirect
RubyGemscapybara3.40.0indirect
RubyGemscoderay1.1.3indirect
RubyGemscoffee-rails5.0.0indirect
RubyGemscoffee-script2.4.1indirect
RubyGemscoffee-script-source1.12.2indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.6indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool3.0.2indirect
RubyGemscrass1.0.6indirect
RubyGemscsv3.3.5indirect
RubyGemsdate3.5.1indirect
RubyGemsdeviseindirect
RubyGemsdevise5.0.2indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.3indirect
RubyGemseffective_bootstrap1.21.18indirect
RubyGemseffective_datatablesindirect
RubyGemseffective_datatables4.36.0indirect
RubyGemseffective_developerindirect
RubyGemseffective_developer0.9.0indirect
RubyGemseffective_resourcesindirect
RubyGemseffective_resources2.35.1indirect
RubyGemseffective_rolesindirect
RubyGemseffective_roles2.8.1indirect
RubyGemseffective_test_botindirect
RubyGemseffective_test_bot1.7.8indirect
RubyGemserb6.0.2indirect
RubyGemserubi1.13.1indirect
RubyGemsexecjs2.10.0indirect
RubyGemsfaker3.6.0indirect
RubyGemsffi1.17.3indirect
RubyGemsglobalid1.3.0indirect
RubyGemshaml7.2.0indirect
RubyGemshaml-railsindirect
RubyGemshaml-rails3.0.0indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.14.8indirect
RubyGemsinline_svg1.10.0indirect
RubyGemsio-console0.8.2indirect
RubyGemsirb1.17.0indirect
RubyGemsjquery-rails4.6.1indirect
RubyGemsjson2.18.1indirect
RubyGemslogger1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsloofah2.25.0indirect
RubyGemsmail2.9.0indirect
RubyGemsmarcel1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsmatrix0.4.3indirect
RubyGemsmethod_source1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsmini_mime1.1.5indirect
RubyGemsminitest6.0.2indirect
RubyGemsminitest-fail-fast0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsminitest-reporters1.7.1indirect
RubyGemsnet-imap0.6.3indirect
RubyGemsnet-pop0.1.2indirect
RubyGemsnet-protocol0.2.2indirect
RubyGemsnet-smtp0.5.1indirect
RubyGemsnio4r2.7.5indirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.19.1indirect
RubyGemsorm_adapter0.5.0indirect
RubyGemspopper_js1.16.1indirect
RubyGemspp0.6.3indirect
RubyGemsprettyprint0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsprism1.9.0indirect
RubyGemspry0.16.0indirect
RubyGemspry-byebugindirect
RubyGemspry-byebug3.12.0indirect
RubyGemspsych5.3.1indirect
RubyGemspublic_suffix7.0.5indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrack3.2.5indirect
RubyGemsrack-session2.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrack-test2.2.0indirect
RubyGemsrackup2.3.1indirect
RubyGemsrailsindirect
RubyGemsrails8.1.2indirect
RubyGemsrails-dom-testing2.3.0indirect
RubyGemsrails-html-sanitizer1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsrailties8.1.2indirect
RubyGemsrake13.3.1indirect
RubyGemsrdoc7.2.0indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.11.3indirect
RubyGemsreline0.6.3indirect
RubyGemsresponders3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemssassc2.4.0indirect
RubyGemssecurerandom0.4.1indirect
RubyGemssprockets4.2.2indirect
RubyGemssprockets-rails3.5.2indirect
RubyGemssqlite3indirect
RubyGemssqlite32.9.1indirect
RubyGemsstringio3.2.0indirect
RubyGemstemple0.10.4indirect
RubyGemsthor1.5.0indirect
RubyGemstilt2.7.0indirect
RubyGemstimecop0.9.10indirect
RubyGemstimeout0.6.0indirect
RubyGemstsort0.2.0indirect
RubyGemstzinfo2.0.6indirect
RubyGemsuri1.1.1indirect
RubyGemsuseragent0.16.11indirect
RubyGemswarden1.2.9indirect
RubyGemswebsocket-driver0.8.0indirect
RubyGemswebsocket-extensions0.1.5indirect
RubyGemswickedindirect
RubyGemswicked2.0.0indirect
RubyGemsxpath3.2.0indirect
RubyGemszeitwerk2.7.5indirect
Dependency advisories 19

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 114 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 19 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 11 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
activestorage8.1.2indirectcritical68.1.3.1
rack-session2.1.1indirectcritical12.1.2
activesupport8.1.2indirecthigh38.1.2.1
addressable2.8.9indirecthigh12.9.0
concurrent-ruby1.3.6indirecthigh31.3.7
erb6.0.2indirecthigh16.0.4
json2.18.1indirecthigh22.19.9
nokogiri1.19.1indirecthigh101.19.4
rack3.2.5indirecthigh133.2.6
websocket-driver0.8.0indirecthigh40.8.2
action_text-trix2.1.16indirectmoderate32.1.18
bcrypt3.1.21indirectmoderate13.1.22
devise5.0.2indirectmoderate25.0.4
loofah2.25.0indirectmoderate52.25.2
net-imap0.6.3indirectmoderate80.6.4.1
sqlite32.9.1indirectmoderate22.9.5
actionpack8.1.2indirectlow18.1.2.1
actionview8.1.2indirectlow18.1.2.1
rails-html-sanitizer1.7.0indirectlow11.7.1

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 statisticsRubyGems.