Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-15 19:43 UTC

dknowles2 / pytboss

Python 3 library for interacting with Pitboss grills and smokers

PythonApache-2.0★ 27 stars⑂ 15 forkssince Dec 2022View on GitHub ↗

dknowles2/pytboss holds a health index of 83 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (93/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (47/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

83
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.

83
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 70 is calibrated to 83 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

David KnowlesPersonal account
45 followers26 public repossince Nov 2009

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 publishTags
PyPIpytboss2026.8.64,3644139 days agopitbossapiiotble

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

93Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 1 days ago
23.5/36Commit cadence — 34/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 246 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year246
human_commit_share0.83
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year34

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 40 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 39 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~37.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count40
latest_release_tag2026.8.6
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release39
mean_days_between_releases37.4
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?

47Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
23/60Stars — 27 stars
9.6/25Forks — 15 forks
2.7/15Watchers — 4 watchers
Inputs used
forks15
stars27
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code 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_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
48.5/80Monthly downloads — 4,364 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagespytboss
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads4,364
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?

59Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 87% of commits
6.8/13.5Contributor breadth — 5 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled5
top_contributor_share0.869
How it's scored
40.7/42Issue resolution — 97% of issues closed
26.2/30PR acceptance — 515/589 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 2/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs515
open_issues1
closed_issues30
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.968
closed_unmerged_prs74
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.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
12/25Owner reach — 45 followers of dknowles2
22.4/25Track record — 26 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers45
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_logindknowles2
public_repos26
account_age_days6,155
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 39 days ago
20/20Version history — 41 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespytboss
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish39

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 26 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsiot, python, pitboss, ble, grill, smoker
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?

67Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 26 out of 26 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
0.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 2/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
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 7 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
4.5/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
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_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate5.9
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
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_packages18
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 pypi:pytboss@2026.8.6 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 18 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
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 79 of 83 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.952
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes2,918
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checking — mypy.ini, pytboss/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 46 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 17 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsmypy.ini, pytboss/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.46
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.17
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (mypy.ini, pytboss/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/39 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes52,103
source_files_sampled39
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

27GitHub stars
5contributors
246commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
40releases
1bus factor
1open 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 ★ / 15 ⇿
0Stars
15Forks
27Releases

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.

03581013151522023-102025-032026-08
Major 0Minor 13Patch 14

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.9 / 10
5.9aggregate

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 · 2026-09-15 19:42 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests26 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 2/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 7 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
9SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
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 5
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIaiohttp—pyproject.toml
PyPIbleak—pyproject.toml
PyPIbleak_retry_connector—pyproject.toml
PyPIdukpy—pyproject.toml
PyPImypy_extensions—pyproject.toml
All dependencies 67

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 6 direct and 61 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaiohttp3.14.3direct
PyPIbleak3.0.2direct
PyPIbleak-retry-connector4.6.3direct
PyPIbleak-retry-connector4.7.0direct
PyPIdukpy0.6.0direct
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0direct
PyPIaiohappyeyeballs2.7.1indirect
PyPIaiooui0.1.9indirect
PyPIaiosignal1.4.0indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.6.0indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIblack26.5.1indirect
PyPIbluetooth-adapters2.4.0indirect
PyPIcfgv3.5.0indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIdbus-fast5.0.22indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.3indirect
PyPIfilelock3.32.0indirect
PyPIfreezegun1.5.5indirect
PyPIfrozenlist1.8.0indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.19indirect
PyPIidna3.18indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIlibrt0.13.0indirect
PyPImultidict6.7.1indirect
PyPImypy2.3.0indirect
PyPImypy2.3.1indirect
PyPInodeenv1.10.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.11.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.6.1indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.6.2indirect
PyPIpropcache0.5.2indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpyobjc-core12.2.1indirect
PyPIpyobjc-framework-cocoa12.2.1indirect
PyPIpyobjc-framework-corebluetooth12.2.1indirect
PyPIpyobjc-framework-libdispatch12.2.1indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-aiohttp1.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio1.4.0indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-discovery1.5.0indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2indirect
PyPIruff0.15.22indirect
PyPIruff0.16.7indirect
PyPIsetuptools—indirect
PyPIsetuptools-scm—indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPItypes-requests2.33.0.20260712indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPIuart-devices0.1.1indirect
PyPIusb-devices0.5.1indirect
PyPIvirtualenv21.7.0indirect
PyPIwinrt-runtime3.2.1indirect
PyPIwinrt-windows-devices-bluetooth3.2.1indirect
PyPIwinrt-windows-devices-bluetooth-advertisement3.2.1indirect
PyPIwinrt-windows-devices-bluetooth-genericattributeprofile3.2.1indirect
PyPIwinrt-windows-devices-enumeration3.2.1indirect
PyPIwinrt-windows-devices-radios3.2.1indirect
PyPIwinrt-windows-foundation3.2.1indirect
PyPIwinrt-windows-foundation-collections3.2.1indirect
PyPIwinrt-windows-storage-streams3.2.1indirect
PyPIyarl1.24.5indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:pytboss@2026.8.6 pulls in 18 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.

The message is kept through sign-in.

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 — PyPI.