Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-08 19:02 UTC

datastax / astrapy

AstraPy is a Pythonic interface for DataStax Astra DB and the Data API

PythonApache-2.0★ 39 stars⑂ 31 forkssince Apr 2021View on GitHub ↗

KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

datastax/astrapy holds a health index of 88 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (84/100) and lowest on Security (55/100). It was last updated 13 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

Excellent

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.

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 74 is calibrated to 88 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

DataStaxOrganization

582 followers132 public repossince Jan 2011

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	Tags
PyPI	astrapy	2.3.1	368,869	63	30 days ago	astra astra-db datastax

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

74Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

68Good

How it's scored

28.8/36	Push recency — last push 13 days ago
13.8/36	Commit cadence — 20/52 weeks with commits
15/18	Commit volume — 46 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 17 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	46
human_commit_share	1
days_since_last_push	13
active_weeks_last_year	20

Release discipline

83Excellent

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 53 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 30 days ago
19.8/27	Release cadence — a release every ~62.9 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.

Inputs used

releases_count	53
latest_release_tag	v2.3.1
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	30
mean_days_between_releases	62.9

Community & Adoption

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

69Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

41Weak

How it's scored

25.6/60	Stars — 39 stars
12.3/25	Forks — 31 forks
3.3/15	Watchers — 5 watchers

Inputs used

forks	31
stars	39
watchers	5
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

85Excellent

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	0
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	yes
readme_badge_services	—
has_pull_request_template	no

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

93Exceptional

How it's scored

74.2/80	Monthly downloads — 368,869 downloads/month across pypi
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	astrapy
dependents	—
ecosystems	pypi
total_downloads	—
monthly_downloads	368,869
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?

84Excellent · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

62Moderate

How it's scored

25.2/54	Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
13.7/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 39% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 14 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 11 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	2
contributors_sampled	14
top_contributor_share	0.391

Issue & PR responsiveness

86Excellent

How it's scored

40.7/42	Issue resolution — 97% of issues closed
26.3/30	PR acceptance — 263/300 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
7.5/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 16/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5

Inputs used

merged_prs	263
open_issues	4
closed_issues	125
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	0
prs_decided_30d	0
issue_closed_ratio	0.969
closed_unmerged_prs	37
first_time_authors_30d	0
first_time_prs_merged_30d	0
first_time_prs_decided_30d	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

94Exceptional

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
19.9/25	Owner reach — 582 followers of datastax
25/25	Track record — 132 public repos, account ~15 yr old

Inputs used

followers	582
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	—
owner_login	datastax
public_repos	132
account_age_days	5,679

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 30 days ago
20/20	Version history — 63 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	astrapy
ecosystems	pypi
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	30

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

82Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

94Exceptional

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 7 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config
9.6/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
20/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 29 out of 29 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	yes
has_precommit_config	yes

Documentation

65Good

How it's scored

30/30	README
0/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://github.com/datastax/astrapy
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 4 topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	python, datastax, stargate, astradb
has_wiki	no
homepage	https://github.com/datastax/astrapy
docs_site	https://github.com/datastax/astrapy
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?

55Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

44Weak

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5	CI-Tests — 29 out of 29 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
3.8/7.5	Code-Review — Found 16/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 11 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 17 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5	Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
5.2/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 3 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	18
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	0
scorecard_aggregate	4.4

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	0
affected_packages	0
assessed_packages	32
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	none
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the pypi:astrapy@2.3.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 32 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.

78Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

85Excellent

How it's scored

45/45	Agent instructions — .bob/rules-advance/AGENTS.md, .bob/rules-ask/AGENTS.md, .bob/rules-code/AGENTS.md, .bob/rules-plan/AGENTS.md, AGENTS.md
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40	Legible commit history — 91 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.91
agent_instruction_files	.bob/rules-advance/AGENTS.md, .bob/rules-ask/AGENTS.md, .bob/rules-code/AGENTS.md, .bob/rules-plan/AGENTS.md, AGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes	3,471

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

72Good

How it's scored

18/18	One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config
11/11	Static type checking — astrapy/py.typed
10/10	Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8	Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	uv.lock
has_dockerfile	yes
typed_language	no
bootstrap_files	Makefile
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	astrapy/py.typed
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	—
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Code legibility for models

80Excellent

How it's scored

27/45	Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (astrapy/py.typed)
52.7/55	Manageable file sizes — 9/218 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Python
largest_source_bytes	280,341
source_files_sampled	218
oversized_source_files	9

Key facts

39GitHub stars

14contributors

46commits, last 12 months

13days since last push

53releases

2bus factor

4open issues

PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 31 ⇿

0Stars

31Forks

46Releases

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 2Minor 10Patch 30

Each point covers 5 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 · 2026-08-08 19:01 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
0	Branch-Protection	branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10	CI-Tests	29 out of 29 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
5	Code-Review	Found 16/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
10	Contributors	project has 11 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0	Dependency-Update-Tool	no update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	17 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10	Packaging	packaging workflow detected
0	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
0	Signed-Releases	Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7	Vulnerabilities	3 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 8

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
PyPI	deprecation	`~= 2.1.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	httpx	`>=0.25.2,<1`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	h11	`>= 0.16.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	ipython	`>= 8.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	pymongo	`>= 3`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	toml	`>= 0.10.2,<1.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	typing-extensions	`>= 4.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	uuid6	`>= 2024.1.12`	pyproject.toml

All dependencies 85

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 9 direct and 76 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
PyPI	deprecation	`2.1.0`	direct
PyPI	h11	`0.16.0`	direct
PyPI	httpx	`0.25.2`	direct
PyPI	ipython	`8.37.0`	direct
PyPI	ipython	`9.6.0`	direct
PyPI	pymongo	`4.13.0`	direct
PyPI	toml	`0.10.2`	direct
PyPI	typing-extensions	`4.13.2`	direct
PyPI	uuid6	`2024.7.10`	direct
PyPI	anyio	`4.9.0`	indirect
PyPI	astrapy	`2.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	asttokens	`3.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	backports-asyncio-runner	`1.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	blockbuster	`1.5.24`	indirect
PyPI	build	`1.2.2.post1`	indirect
PyPI	cassandra-driver	`3.29.2`	indirect
PyPI	cassio	`0.1.10`	indirect
PyPI	certifi	`2025.4.26`	indirect
PyPI	cfgv	`3.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	charset-normalizer	`3.4.2`	indirect
PyPI	click	`8.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	colorama	`0.4.6`	indirect
PyPI	coverage	`7.0.5`	indirect
PyPI	decorator	`5.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	distlib	`0.3.9`	indirect
PyPI	dnspython	`2.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	docker	`7.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	exceptiongroup	`1.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	executing	`2.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	faker	`23.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	filelock	`3.24.3`	indirect
PyPI	forbiddenfruit	`0.1.4`	indirect
PyPI	geomet	`0.2.1.post1`	indirect
PyPI	h2	`4.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	hpack	`4.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	httpcore	`1.0.9`	indirect
PyPI	hyperframe	`6.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	identify	`2.6.10`	indirect
PyPI	idna	`3.18`	indirect
PyPI	importlib-metadata	`8.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	iniconfig	`2.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	ipython-pygments-lexers	`1.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	jedi	`0.19.2`	indirect
PyPI	markupsafe	`3.0.2`	indirect
PyPI	matplotlib-inline	`0.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	mypy	`1.9.0`	indirect
PyPI	mypy-extensions	`1.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	nodeenv	`1.9.1`	indirect
PyPI	numpy	`2.2.6`	indirect
PyPI	packaging	`25.0`	indirect
PyPI	parso	`0.8.5`	indirect
PyPI	pexpect	`4.9.0`	indirect
PyPI	platformdirs	`4.3.8`	indirect
PyPI	pluggy	`1.5.0`	indirect
PyPI	pre-commit	`3.5.0`	indirect
PyPI	prompt-toolkit	`3.0.52`	indirect
PyPI	ptyprocess	`0.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	pure-eval	`0.2.3`	indirect
PyPI	pygments	`2.20.0`	indirect
PyPI	pyproject-hooks	`1.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest	`9.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-asyncio	`1.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-cov	`4.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-httpserver	`1.0.12`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-testdox	`3.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	python-dateutil	`2.9.0.post0`	indirect
PyPI	python-dotenv	`1.2.2`	indirect
PyPI	pywin32	`310`	indirect
PyPI	pyyaml	`6.0.2`	indirect
PyPI	requests	`2.34.2`	indirect
PyPI	ruff	`0.11.9`	indirect
PyPI	setuptools	`80.7.1`	indirect
PyPI	six	`1.17.0`	indirect
PyPI	sniffio	`1.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	stack-data	`0.6.3`	indirect
PyPI	testcontainers	`3.7.1`	indirect
PyPI	tomli	`2.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	traitlets	`5.14.3`	indirect
PyPI	types-toml	`0.10.8.20240310`	indirect
PyPI	urllib3	`2.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	virtualenv	`20.38.0`	indirect
PyPI	wcwidth	`0.2.14`	indirect
PyPI	werkzeug	`3.1.6`	indirect
PyPI	wrapt	`1.17.2`	indirect
PyPI	zipp	`3.21.0`	indirect

Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:astrapy@2.3.1 pulls in 32 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

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — PyPI.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records