Public record
Software health reportschema 0.27.0 · metrics 2.5.0 · 2026-07-31 23:32 UTC

colorjs / color-interpolate

Get interpolated color from a palette

JavaScriptNo license detected★ 70 stars⑂ 9 forkssince Aug 2016View on GitHub ↗

colorjs/color-interpolate holds a health index of 29 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (56/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (26/100). It was last updated 9 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

29
overall / 100
At Risk

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.

29
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 43 is calibrated to 39 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02). High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 75% multiplier to weighted overall health and gives it an At Risk ceiling of 34.

Ownership

color.jsOrganization
49 followers22 public repossince Mar 2017

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npmcolor-interpolate2.1.182,180119 days agocolorinterpolatelerpinterpolate-arraysinterpolationsmootsteppalettecolormapgradient

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

26At Risk · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 9 days ago
0.7/36Commit cadence — 1/52 weeks with commits
7.6/18Commit volume — 6 commits in the last year
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
commits_last_year6
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push9
active_weeks_last_year1
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?

44Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
29.8/60Stars — 70 stars
7.5/25Forks — 9 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks9
stars70
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
0/22.5License — no license file detected
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseno
readme_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
65.5/80Monthly downloads — 82,180 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagescolor-interpolate
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads82,180
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?

56Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 87% of commits
6.8/13.5Contributor breadth — 5 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled5
top_contributor_share0.868
How it's scored
16.8/42Issue resolution — 40% of issues closed
20/30PR acceptance — 6/9 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 6/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs6
open_issues3
closed_issues2
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.4
closed_unmerged_prs3
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
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
12.2/25Owner reach — 49 followers of colorjs
21.9/25Track record — 22 public repos, account ~9 yr old
Inputs used
followers49
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_logincolorjs
public_repos22
account_age_days3,435

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 9 days ago
20/20Version history — 11 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagescolor-interpolate
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish9

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

48Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .eslintrc.json
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 3 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscolor, colormap, colorjs
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?

42Weak · 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 — 0 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5Code-Review — Found 6/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
0/2.5License — license file not detected
3.8/7.5Maintained — 6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
0/5Packaging — no data
1.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
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_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate3.7
high_risk_jurisdiction_cap34
high_risk_jurisdiction_multiplier75
security_posture_after_multiplier28
security_posture_before_jurisdiction37
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): packaging, signed_releases. Remaining weights renormalized. High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 75% multiplier and gives Security posture an At risk ceiling of 34.

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_packages4
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:color-interpolate@2.1.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 4 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.

26At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
13.7/40Legible commit history — 10 of 39 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
legible_history_share0.256
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .eslintrc.json
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 39
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_testsno
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
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/3 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes887
source_files_sampled3
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

70GitHub stars
5contributors
6commits, last 12 months
9days since last push
0releases
1bus factor
3open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

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

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.

0246810912016-102019-012021-04

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.7 / 10
3.7aggregate

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 · 2026-07-31 23:32 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 6/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
0Licenselicense file not detected
5Maintained6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
3Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
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 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmcolor-rgba^3.1.0package.json
All dependencies 4

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 3 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmcolor-rgba3.1.0direct
npmcolor-name2.1.0indirect
npmcolor-parse2.1.0indirect
npmcolor-space3.1.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing npm:color-interpolate@2.1.1 pulls in 4 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

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 v0.27.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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