Public recordExceptional
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-06 00:43 UTC
databricks / databricks-sdk-go
Databricks SDK for Go
databricks/databricks-sdk-go holds a health index of 93 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (100/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (64/100). It was last updated today. 4 contributors account for most of its recent work.
93
overall / 100Software 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.
93
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)
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 79 is calibrated to 93 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).
Ownership
DatabricksOrganization · verified domain
4,018 followers258 public repossince Jul 2013
This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.
Package ecosystems
| Registry | Package | Version | Downloads / mo | Versions | Last publish |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Go | github.com/databricks/databricks-sdk-go | v0.177.0 | - | 199 | 5 days ago |
Metrics by category
Vitality
Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?
100
Development activity
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 36/36 | Push recency — last push 0 days ago |
| 36/36 | Commit cadence — 52/52 weeks with commits |
| 18/18 | Commit volume — 394 commits in the last year |
| 10/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
Inputs used
| commits_last_year | 394 |
| human_commit_share | 0.12 |
| days_since_last_push | 0 |
| active_weeks_last_year | 52 |
Release discipline
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 27/27 | Ships releases — 100 releases published |
| 36/36 | Release recency — latest release 5 days ago |
| 27/27 | Release cadence — a release every ~3.1 days |
| 0/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data |
Inputs used
| releases_count | 100 |
| latest_release_tag | v0.177.0 |
| releases_from_tags | no |
| days_since_latest_release | 5 |
| mean_days_between_releases | 3.1 |
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?
64
Popularity & adoption
52Moderate
How it's scored
| 31/60 | Stars — 83 stars |
| 15.8/25 | Forks — 80 forks |
| 5.6/15 | Watchers — 11 watchers |
Inputs used
| forks | 80 |
| stars | 83 |
| watchers | 11 |
| growth_state | unverified |
| growth_factor_pct | 100 |
| growth_unverified_reason | no_history |
Community health
77Good
How it's scored
| 22.5/22.5 | README |
| 22.5/22.5 | License — recognized license (Apache-2.0) |
| 18/18 | CONTRIBUTING guide |
| 0/13.5 | Code of conduct |
| 0/7.2 | Issue template |
| 6.3/6.3 | PR template |
Inputs used
| has_readme | yes |
| has_license | yes |
| readme_badges | 0 |
| has_contributing | yes |
| has_issue_template | no |
| has_code_of_conduct | no |
| readme_badge_services | — |
| has_pull_request_template | yes |
Sustainability & Governance
Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?
86
Maintainer resilience (bus factor)
84Excellent
How it's scored
| 43.2/54 | Bus factor — 4 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| 17.4/22.5 | Commit distribution — top contributor authored 23% of commits |
| 13.5/13.5 | Contributor breadth — 40 contributors |
| 10/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations |
Inputs used
| bus_factor | 4 |
| contributors_sampled | 40 |
| top_contributor_share | 0.227 |
Issue & PR responsiveness
62Moderate
How it's scored
| 37.4/42 | Issue resolution — 89% of issues closed |
| 21.9/30 | PR acceptance — 1,071/1,468 decided PRs merged |
| 0/13 | Newcomer PR acceptance — 0/3 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d |
| 3/15 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 7/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2 |
Inputs used
| merged_prs | 1,071 |
| open_issues | 37 |
| closed_issues | 299 |
| prs_merged_7d | 0 |
| prs_decided_7d | 0 |
| prs_merged_30d | 6 |
| prs_decided_30d | 10 |
| issue_closed_ratio | 0.89 |
| closed_unmerged_prs | 397 |
| first_time_authors_30d | 3 |
| first_time_prs_merged_30d | 0 |
| first_time_prs_decided_30d | 3 |
Ownership & stewardship
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 30/30 | Ownership backing — organization-owned |
| 20/20 | Verified domain |
| 25/25 | Owner reach — 4,018 followers of databricks |
| 25/25 | Track record — 258 public repos, account ~13 yr old |
Inputs used
| followers | 4,018 |
| owner_type | Organization |
| is_verified | yes |
| owner_login | databricks |
| public_repos | 258 |
| account_age_days | 4,803 |
Package maintenance
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 25/25 | Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go |
| 35/35 | Publish recency — latest publish 5 days ago |
| 20/20 | Version history — 199 published versions |
| 20/20 | Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked |
Inputs used
| packages | github.com/databricks/databricks-sdk-go |
| ecosystems | go |
| any_deprecated | no |
| min_days_since_publish | 5 |
Engineering Quality
Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?
67
Engineering practices
68Good
How it's scored
| 24/24 | CI workflows — 9 workflow(s) |
| 24/24 | Tests present |
| 0/16 | Linter config |
| 0/9.6 | Pre-commit hooks |
| 0/6.4 | .editorconfig |
| 20/20 | OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 20 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
Inputs used
| has_ci | yes |
| has_tests | yes |
| has_editorconfig | no |
| has_linter_config | no |
| has_precommit_config | no |
Documentation
65Good
How it's scored
| 30/30 | README |
| 0/25 | Documentation directory |
| 15/15 | Documentation / homepage site — https://docs.databricks.com/dev-tools/sdk-go.html |
| 10/10 | Repository description |
| 10/10 | Topics — 4 topics |
| 0/10 | Wiki |
Inputs used
| topics | databricks, databricks-sdk, go, databricks-automation |
| has_wiki | no |
| homepage | https://docs.databricks.com/dev-tools/sdk-go.html |
| docs_site | https://docs.databricks.com/dev-tools/sdk-go.html |
| has_readme | yes |
| has_docs_dir | no |
| has_description | yes |
Security
Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?
67
Security posture
67Good
How it's scored
| 7.5/7.5 | Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo |
| 3.8/7.5 | Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| 2.5/2.5 | CI-Tests — 20 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| 0/2.5 | CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| 1.5/7.5 | Code-Review — Found 7/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2 |
| 2.5/2.5 | Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations |
| 10/10 | Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| 7.5/7.5 | Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected |
| 0/5 | Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed |
| 2.5/2.5 | License — license file detected |
| 7.5/7.5 | Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| 5/5 | Packaging — packaging workflow detected |
| 5/5 | Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned |
| 5/5 | SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits |
| 5/5 | Security-Policy — security policy file detected |
| 0/7.5 | Signed-Releases — no data |
| 0/7.5 | Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| 0/7.5 | Vulnerabilities — 32 existing vulnerabilities detected |
Inputs used
| source | openssf_scorecard |
| checks_evaluated | 17 |
| scorecard_version | v5.5.0 |
| checks_inconclusive | 1 |
| scorecard_aggregate | 6.7 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
Dependency advisories
65Good
How it's scored
| 14.6/35 | Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 3 affected: golang.org/x/net v0.48.0 (moderate 6.5), golang.org/x/mod v0.30.0 (unknown), golang.org/x/text v0.32.0 (unknown) |
| 0/25 | Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope |
| 34.4/40 | No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 121 days ago |
Inputs used
| source | osv |
| advisories | 48 |
| affected_packages | 7 |
| assessed_packages | 47 |
| unassessed_packages | 0 |
| affected_by_severity | critical 2, high 1, moderate 1, unknown 3 |
| direct_affected_packages | 3 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 47 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.
91
Agent context & guidance
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 45/45 | Agent instructions — .cursor/rules/00-claude-context.mdc, .cursor/rules/api-design.mdc, .cursor/rules/error-handling.mdc, .cursor/rules/style-guide.mdc, .cursor/rules/testing.mdc, .cursorrules, .github/copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md |
| 15/15 | Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.databricks.com/llms.txt) |
| 0/40 | Legible commit history — no data |
Inputs used
| has_llms_txt | yes |
| llms_txt_url | https://docs.databricks.com/llms.txt |
| legible_history_share | — |
| agent_instruction_files | .cursor/rules/00-claude-context.mdc, .cursor/rules/api-design.mdc, .cursor/rules/error-handling.mdc, .cursor/rules/style-guide.mdc, .cursor/rules/testing.mdc, .cursorrules, .github/copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md |
| agent_instruction_max_bytes | 4,974 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
| 18/18 | One-command bootstrap — Makefile |
| 22/22 | Automated tests |
| 0/11 | Lint / format config |
| 11/11 | Static type checking — Go (statically typed) |
| 10/10 | Reproducible environment — lockfile |
| 2/10 | Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited |
| 5/8 | Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits |
| 10/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned |
Inputs used
| has_nix | no |
| has_tests | yes |
| lockfiles | go.sum |
| has_dockerfile | no |
| typed_language | yes |
| bootstrap_files | Makefile |
| has_devcontainer | no |
| has_linter_config | no |
| typecheck_configs | — |
| agent_commit_share | 0.01 |
| toolchain_manifests | examples/slog/go.mod, examples/zerolog/go.mod, go.mod |
| dependency_bot_commit_share | 0 |
Code legibility for models
97Exceptional
How it's scored
| 45/45 | Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed) |
| 52/55 | Manageable file sizes — 42/773 source files over 60KB |
Inputs used
| primary_language | Go |
| largest_source_bytes | 452,152 |
| source_files_sampled | 773 |
| oversized_source_files | 42 |
Machine-readable interfaces
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 0/40 | API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software |
| 0/20 | MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software |
| 40/40 | Runnable examples — examples |
Inputs used
| example_dirs | examples |
| has_mcp_signal | no |
| api_schema_files | — |
| interfaces_expected_of | — |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.
Key facts
83GitHub stars
40contributors
394commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
4bus factor
37open issues
Gopackage ecosystems
Data collection warnings
- Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
More detail
Star and fork history 0 ★ / 80 ⇿
0Stars
80Forks
98Releases
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.
Major 0Minor 98Patch 0
Each point covers 4 days.
OpenSSF Scorecard 6.7 / 10
6.7aggregate
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).
| 10 | Binary-Artifacts | no binaries found in the repo |
| 5 | Branch-Protection | branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| 10 | CI-Tests | 20 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| 0 | CII-Best-Practices | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| 2 | Code-Review | Found 7/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2 |
| 10 | Contributors | project has 5 contributing companies or organizations |
| 10 | Dangerous-Workflow | no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| 10 | Dependency-Update-Tool | update tool detected |
| 0 | Fuzzing | project is not fuzzed |
| 10 | License | license file detected |
| 10 | Maintained | 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| 10 | Packaging | packaging workflow detected |
| 10 | Pinned-Dependencies | all dependencies are pinned |
| 10 | SAST | SAST tool is run on all commits |
| 10 | Security-Policy | security policy file detected |
| n/a | Signed-Releases | no releases found |
| 0 | Token-Permissions | detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| 0 | Vulnerabilities | 32 existing vulnerabilities detected |
Direct dependencies 14
| Registry | Package | Version constraint | Manifest |
|---|---|---|---|
| Go | github.com/google/go-cmp | v0.7.0 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/google/go-querystring | v1.1.0 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/google/uuid | v1.6.0 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/pkg/browser | v0.0.0-20240102092130-5ac0b6a4141c | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/stretchr/testify | v1.11.1 | go.mod |
| Go | golang.org/x/exp | v0.0.0-20240222234643-814bf88cf225 | go.mod |
| Go | golang.org/x/mod | v0.30.0 | go.mod |
| Go | golang.org/x/net | v0.48.0 | go.mod |
| Go | golang.org/x/oauth2 | v0.34.0 | go.mod |
| Go | golang.org/x/text | v0.32.0 | go.mod |
| Go | golang.org/x/time | v0.5.0 | go.mod |
| Go | google.golang.org/api | v0.182.0 | go.mod |
| Go | google.golang.org/protobuf | v1.36.10 | go.mod |
| Go | gopkg.in/ini.v1 | v1.67.0 | go.mod |
All dependencies 47
Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 17 direct and 30 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.
| Registry | Package | Version | Relation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Go | github.com/google/go-cmp | v0.7.0 | direct |
| Go | github.com/google/go-querystring | v1.1.0 | direct |
| Go | github.com/google/uuid | v1.6.0 | direct |
| Go | github.com/pkg/browser | v0.0.0-20240102092130-5ac0b6a4141c | direct |
| Go | github.com/stretchr/testify | v1.11.1 | direct |
| Go | golang.org/x/exp | v0.0.0-20230307190834-24139beb5833 | direct |
| Go | golang.org/x/exp | v0.0.0-20240222234643-814bf88cf225 | direct |
| Go | golang.org/x/mod | v0.30.0 | direct |
| Go | golang.org/x/net | v0.48.0 | direct |
| Go | golang.org/x/oauth2 | v0.34.0 | direct |
| Go | golang.org/x/text | v0.32.0 | direct |
| Go | golang.org/x/time | v0.3.0 | direct |
| Go | golang.org/x/time | v0.5.0 | direct |
| Go | google.golang.org/api | v0.146.0 | direct |
| Go | google.golang.org/api | v0.182.0 | direct |
| Go | google.golang.org/protobuf | v1.36.10 | direct |
| Go | gopkg.in/ini.v1 | v1.67.0 | direct |
| Go | cloud.google.com/go/auth | v0.4.2 | indirect |
| Go | cloud.google.com/go/auth/oauth2adapt | v0.2.2 | indirect |
| Go | cloud.google.com/go/compute/metadata | v0.9.0 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/cespare/xxhash/v2 | v2.3.0 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/databricks/databricks-sdk-go | v0.24.0 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/davecgh/go-spew | v1.1.1 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/felixge/httpsnoop | v1.0.4 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/go-logr/logr | v1.4.3 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/go-logr/stdr | v1.2.2 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/golang/groupcache | v0.0.0-20210331224755-41bb18bfe9da | indirect |
| Go | github.com/golang/protobuf | v1.5.4 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/google/s2a-go | v0.1.7 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/googleapis/enterprise-certificate-proxy | v0.3.1 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/googleapis/enterprise-certificate-proxy | v0.3.2 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/mattn/go-colorable | v0.1.13 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/mattn/go-isatty | v0.0.17 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/pmezard/go-difflib | v1.0.0 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/rs/zerolog | v1.29.0 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/stretchr/objx | v0.5.2 | indirect |
| Go | go.opencensus.io | v0.24.0 | indirect |
| Go | go.opentelemetry.io/auto/sdk | v1.2.1 | indirect |
| Go | go.opentelemetry.io/contrib/instrumentation/net/http/otelhttp | v0.49.0 | indirect |
| Go | go.opentelemetry.io/otel | v1.39.0 | indirect |
| Go | go.opentelemetry.io/otel/metric | v1.39.0 | indirect |
| Go | go.opentelemetry.io/otel/trace | v1.39.0 | indirect |
| Go | golang.org/x/crypto | v0.46.0 | indirect |
| Go | golang.org/x/sys | v0.39.0 | indirect |
| Go | google.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/rpc | v0.0.0-20251202230838-ff82c1b0f217 | indirect |
| Go | google.golang.org/grpc | v1.79.3 | indirect |
| Go | gopkg.in/yaml.v3 | v3.0.1 | indirect |
Dependency advisories 7
This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 47 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 7 carry known advisories, of which 3 are direct.
| Package | Version | Relation | Severity | Advisories | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| golang.org/x/crypto | v0.46.0 | indirect | critical | 30 | 0.56.0 |
| google.golang.org/grpc | v1.79.3 | indirect | critical | 3 | 1.83.1 |
| go.opentelemetry.io/otel | v1.39.0 | indirect | high | 2 | 1.41.0 |
| golang.org/x/net | v0.48.0 | direct | moderate | 9 | 1.27.0-rc.3 |
| golang.org/x/mod | v0.30.0 | direct | unknown | 2 | 1.27.0-rc.3 |
| golang.org/x/text | v0.32.0 | direct | unknown | 1 | 0.39.0 |
| golang.org/x/sys | v0.39.0 | indirect | unknown | 1 | 0.44.0 |
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.
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 — Go.