Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 01:16 UTC

deivid-rodriguez / byebug

Debugging in Ruby

Ruby · CBSD-2-Clause★ 3,349 stars⑂ 328 forkssince Mar 2013View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined
#byebug#ruby#debugger#repl

deivid-rodriguez/byebug holds a health index of 81 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (92/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (35/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

81
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.

81
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 69 is calibrated to 81 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

David RodríguezPersonal account
1,340 followers243 public repossince Nov 2012@spinel-coop

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemsbyebug13.0.0-83182 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

66Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

69Good
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 1 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence — 8/52 weeks with commits
17.2/18Commit volume — 82 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 23 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year82
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year8

Release discipline

62Moderate
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 81 releases published
16.2/36Release recency — latest release 182 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~317.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count81
latest_release_tagv13.0.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release182
mean_days_between_releases317.4
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?

92Excellent · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

87Excellent
How it's scored
57.2/60Stars — 3,349 stars
21/25Forks — 328 forks
8.7/15Watchers — 38 watchers
Inputs used
forks328
stars3,349
watchers38
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

93Exceptional
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (BSD-2-Clause)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
7.2/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

100Exceptional
How it's scored
80/80Total downloads — 468,269,768 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesbyebug
dependents—
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads468,269,768
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?

65Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

40Weak
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
7.6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 66% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 72 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 22 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled72
top_contributor_share0.663

Issue & PR responsiveness

69Good
How it's scored
30.7/42Issue resolution — 73% of issues closed
23.1/30PR acceptance — 531/689 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 5/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs531
open_issues76
closed_issues207
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.731
closed_unmerged_prs158
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.

Ownership & stewardship

72Good
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
22.5/25Owner reach — 1,340 followers of deivid-rodriguez
25/25Track record — 243 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,340
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_logindeivid-rodriguez
public_repos243
account_age_days4,980
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

91Excellent
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on rubygems
26/35Publish recency — latest publish 182 days ago
20/20Version history — 83 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesbyebug
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish182

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

74Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

84Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 28 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
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 — 4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsbyebug, ruby, debugger, repl
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?

57Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

57Moderate
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 28 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3/7.5Code-Review — Found 5/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 22 contributing companies or organizations
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 — 23 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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
3/7.5Vulnerabilities — 6 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

35Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

53Moderate
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Ruby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/187 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes20,763
source_files_sampled187
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

3,349GitHub stars
72contributors
82commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
81releases
1bus factor
76open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.7 / 10
5.7aggregate

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 · 2026-07-17 01:16 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
10CI-Tests28 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4Code-ReviewFound 5/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
10Contributorsproject has 22 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained23 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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
4Vulnerabilities6 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 60

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 60 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsaddressable2.9.0indirect
RubyGemsast2.4.3indirect
RubyGemsbundler—indirect
RubyGemschandler0.9.0indirect
RubyGemschef-utils18.9.4indirect
RubyGemscoderay1.1.3indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.6indirect
RubyGemsdate3.5.1indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.3indirect
RubyGemserb6.0.4indirect
RubyGemsfaraday2.14.1indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-net_http3.4.2indirect
RubyGemsio-console0.8.2indirect
RubyGemsirb1.18.0indirect
RubyGemsjson2.19.3indirect
RubyGemsjson2.19.4indirect
RubyGemskramdown2.5.1indirect
RubyGemskramdown-parser-gfm1.1.0indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.5indirect
RubyGemslint_roller1.1.0indirect
RubyGemslogger1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsmdl0.15.0indirect
RubyGemsmethod_source1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsminitest6.0.5indirect
RubyGemsminitest-mock5.27.0indirect
RubyGemsmixlib-cli2.1.8indirect
RubyGemsmixlib-config3.0.27indirect
RubyGemsmixlib-shellout3.3.9indirect
RubyGemsnet-http0.9.1indirect
RubyGemsnetrc0.11.0indirect
RubyGemsoctokit9.2.0indirect
RubyGemsparallel2.0.1indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.11.1indirect
RubyGemspp0.6.3indirect
RubyGemsprettyprint0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsprism1.9.0indirect
RubyGemspry0.16.0indirect
RubyGemspsych5.3.1indirect
RubyGemspublic_suffix7.0.5indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrake13.4.2indirect
RubyGemsrake-compiler1.3.1indirect
RubyGemsrdoc7.2.0indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.12.0indirect
RubyGemsreline—indirect
RubyGemsreline0.6.3indirect
RubyGemsrexml3.4.4indirect
RubyGemsrubocop1.86.1indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.49.1indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-performance1.26.1indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemssawyer0.9.2indirect
RubyGemsstringio3.2.0indirect
RubyGemstomlrb2.0.4indirect
RubyGemstsort0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-emoji4.2.0indirect
RubyGemsuri1.1.1indirect
RubyGemsyard0.9.43indirect
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 deivid-rodriguez/byebug. Read them side by side →

94ruby/irbinteractive RubyExceptional99newrelic/newrelic-ruby-agentNew Relic RPM Ruby AgentExceptional99ruby/rubygemsLibrary packaging and distribution for Ruby.Exceptional99fluent/fluentdFluentd: Unified Logging Layer (project under CNCF)Exceptional99opf/openprojectOpenProject is the leading open source project management software for product, project and portfolio management. A powerful Jira alternative with agile planning, issue tracking, roadmaps, Gantt charts, time tracking, collaboration features, and more. Available on premises or in the cloud. ⭐Star us on GitHubExceptional98DataDog/dd-trace-rbDatadog's client library for RubyExceptional

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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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