Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-14 02:15 UTC

dbca-wa / wastd

Western Australian Sea Turtle and Strandings Database

Python · HTMLMIT★ 7 stars⑂ 4 forkssince Jul 2016View on GitHub ↗
KindNetwork servicehow this is determined
#biodiversity#conservation-bio#marine-species#strandings#marine-wildlife-incidents#marine-turtles

dbca-wa/wastd holds a health index of 84 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (89/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (42/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

84
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.

84
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 71 is calibrated to 84 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and AttractionsOrganization
27 followers234 public repossince Jan 2016

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?

89Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

90Excellent
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
26.3/36Commit cadence — 38/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 445 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year445
human_commit_share0.97
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year38

Release discipline

88Excellent
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 100 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recency — latest release 5 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~2.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag2.4.3
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release5
mean_days_between_releases2.4
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?

42Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

21At Risk
How it's scored
12.6/60Stars — 7 stars
4/25Forks — 4 forks
4.3/15Watchers — 7 watchers
Inputs used
forks4
stars7
watchers7
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

65Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code 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_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

61Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

54Moderate
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 48% of commits
6.8/13.5Contributor breadth — 5 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled5
top_contributor_share0.48

Issue & PR responsiveness

65Good
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
14.9/30PR acceptance — 236/474 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs236
open_issues0
closed_issues329
prs_merged_7d3
prs_decided_7d3
prs_merged_30d27
prs_decided_30d27
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs238
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.

Ownership & stewardship

65Good
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
10.4/25Owner reach — 27 followers of dbca-wa
25/25Track record — 234 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers27
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_logindbca-wa
public_repos234
account_age_days3,900

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

88Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

86Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .flake8, pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
12/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 6 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://dbca-wa.github.io/wastd/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsbiodiversity, conservation-bio, marine-species, strandings, marine-wildlife-incidents, marine-turtles
has_wikino
homepagehttps://dbca-wa.github.io/wastd/
docs_sitehttps://dbca-wa.github.io/wastd/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?

77Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

71Good
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
1.5/2.5CI-Tests — 6 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
3.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 7
2/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 4
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
6.8/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate7.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages111
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
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 111 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.

61Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

68Good
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — .github/copilot-instructions.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
23.1/40Legible commit history — 42 of 97 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.433
agent_instruction_files.github/copilot-instructions.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes6,785

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

58Moderate
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .flake8, pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 3 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
7/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.03

Code legibility for models

53Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
52.8/55Manageable file sizes — 6/150 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes274,424
source_files_sampled150
oversized_source_files6

Key facts

7GitHub stars
5contributors
445commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
2bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch pypi package 'wastd' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 4 ⇿
0Stars
4Forks
60Releases

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.

1223344412020-022023-042026-06
Major 2Minor 6Patch 52

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.1 / 10
7.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-14 02:15 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
6CI-Tests6 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
7Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 7
4SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 4
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 41
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIdjango==5.2.17pyproject.toml
PyPIpsycopg==3.3.4pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-extensions==4.1pyproject.toml
PyPIdj-database-url==3.1.2pyproject.toml
PyPIgunicorn==26.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-dotenv==1.2.2pyproject.toml
PyPIdbca-utils==2.2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-fsm==2.8.1pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-fsm-log==3.1.0pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-fsm-admin-maintained==1.2.6pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-dateutil==2.9.0.post0pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-slugify==8.0.4pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-filter==25.2pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-polymorphic==4.11.5pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-reversion==6.3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-crispy-forms==2.6pyproject.toml
PyPIxmltodict==1.0.4pyproject.toml
PyPIpandas==3.0.3pyproject.toml
PyPIrequests==2.34.2pyproject.toml
PyPIpytz==2026.2pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-select2==8.4.1pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-geojson==4.2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-import-export==4.4.1pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-export-download==0.2.3pyproject.toml
PyPIpillow==12.3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIwhitenoise==6.12.0pyproject.toml
PyPIphonenumbers==9.0.32pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-phonenumber-field==8.4.0pyproject.toml
PyPImssql-django==1.7.2pyproject.toml
PyPIwebtemplate-dbca==1.8.3pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-storages==1.14.6pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-grappelli==4.0.4pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-nested-admin==4.1.6pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-bootstrap4==26.1pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-easy-select2==1.5.8pyproject.toml
PyPIsentry-sdk==2.62.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-docx==1.2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIsetuptools==83.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIopenpyxl==3.1.5pyproject.toml
PyPIxlwt==1.3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIdjango-leaflet==0.33.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 111

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 41 direct and 70 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIdbca-utils2.2.0direct
PyPIdj-database-url3.1.2direct
PyPIdjango5.2.17direct
PyPIdjango-bootstrap426.1direct
PyPIdjango-crispy-forms2.6direct
PyPIdjango-easy-select21.5.8direct
PyPIdjango-export-download0.2.3direct
PyPIdjango-extensions4.1direct
PyPIdjango-filter25.2direct
PyPIdjango-fsm2.8.1direct
PyPIdjango-fsm-admin-maintained1.2.6direct
PyPIdjango-fsm-log3.1.0direct
PyPIdjango-geojson4.2.0direct
PyPIdjango-grappelli4.0.4direct
PyPIdjango-import-export4.4.1direct
PyPIdjango-leaflet0.33.0direct
PyPIdjango-nested-admin4.1.6direct
PyPIdjango-phonenumber-field8.4.0direct
PyPIdjango-polymorphic4.11.5direct
PyPIdjango-reversion6.3.0direct
PyPIdjango-select28.4.1direct
PyPIdjango-storages1.14.6direct
PyPIgunicorn26.0.0direct
PyPImssql-django1.7.2direct
PyPIopenpyxl3.1.5direct
PyPIpandas3.0.3direct
PyPIphonenumbers9.0.32direct
PyPIpillow12.3.0direct
PyPIpsycopg3.3.4direct
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0direct
PyPIpython-docx1.2.0direct
PyPIpython-dotenv1.2.2direct
PyPIpython-slugify8.0.4direct
PyPIpytz2026.2direct
PyPIrequests2.34.2direct
PyPIsentry-sdk2.62.0direct
PyPIsetuptools83.0.0direct
PyPIwebtemplate-dbca1.8.3direct
PyPIwhitenoise6.12.0direct
PyPIxlwt1.3.0direct
PyPIxmltodict1.0.4direct
PyPIasgiref3.12.1indirect
PyPIasttokens3.0.2indirect
PyPIazure-core1.41.0indirect
PyPIazure-storage-blob12.30.0indirect
PyPIbeautifulsoup44.15.0indirect
PyPIbrotli1.2.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.7.22indirect
PyPIcffi2.1.1indirect
PyPIcfgv3.5.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.5.1indirect
PyPIclick8.4.2indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverage7.15.4indirect
PyPIcryptography50.0.0indirect
PyPIdecorator5.3.1indirect
PyPIdeptry0.25.1indirect
PyPIdiff-match-patch20241021indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.3indirect
PyPIdjango-appconf1.2.0indirect
PyPIdjango-debug-toolbar6.3.0indirect
PyPIdjango-stubs6.1.0indirect
PyPIdjango-stubs-ext6.1.0indirect
PyPIet-xmlfile2.0.0indirect
PyPIexecuting2.2.1indirect
PyPIfilelock3.32.3indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.19indirect
PyPIidna3.19indirect
PyPIipdb0.13.13indirect
PyPIipython9.16.1indirect
PyPIipython-pygments-lexers1.1.1indirect
PyPIisodate0.7.2indirect
PyPIjedi0.20.0indirect
PyPIlxml6.1.1indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImatplotlib-inline0.2.2indirect
PyPInodeenv1.10.0indirect
PyPInumpy2.5.2indirect
PyPIpackaging26.3indirect
PyPIparso0.8.7indirect
PyPIpexpect4.9.0indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.11.3indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.6.2indirect
PyPIprompt-toolkit3.0.53indirect
PyPIpsutil7.2.2indirect
PyPIpsycopg-binary3.3.4indirect
PyPIpsycopg-pool3.3.1indirect
PyPIptyprocess0.7.0indirect
PyPIpure-eval0.2.3indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.21.0indirect
PyPIpyodbc5.3.0indirect
PyPIpython-discovery1.5.2indirect
PyPIpython-monkey-business1.1.0indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIrequirements-parser0.13.1indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsoupsieve2.9.2indirect
PyPIsqlparse0.6.0indirect
PyPIstack-data0.6.3indirect
PyPItablib3.10.0indirect
PyPItext-unidecode1.3indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItraitlets5.16.1indirect
PyPItypes-pyyaml6.0.12.20260815indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPItzdata2026.3indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIvirtualenv21.7.4indirect
PyPIwastd2.3.6indirect
PyPIwcwidth0.8.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 111 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

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.

The message is kept through sign-in.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with dbca-wa/wastd. Read them side by side →

67BelgianBiodiversityPlatform/python-dwca-reader🐍 A Python package to read Darwin Core Archive (DwC-A) files.Good42localcosmos/localcosmos-serverPrivate Server for localcosmos.org appsWeak90SpeciesFileGroup/taxonworksWorkbench for biodiversity informatics.Excellent73living-atlases/generator-living-atlasAn Yeoman Generator for Living Atlas Ansible InventoriesGood71PoisotLab/SpeciesDistributionToolkit.jlWork with species distributions in JuliaGood67EcoJulia/EcoSISTEM.jlJulia package for ecosystem simulationGood

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.