Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-21 07:36 UTC

dotnet / LLVMSharp

LLVM bindings for .NET Standard written in C# using ClangSharp

C#MIT★ 950 stars⑂ 112 forkssince Feb 2015View on GitHub ↗

dotnet/LLVMSharp holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (77/100) and lowest on Security (55/100). It was last updated 48 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

78
overall / 100
Good

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.

78
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 67 is calibrated to 78 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

.NET PlatformOrganization · verified domain
23,567 followers280 public repossince Oct 2014

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
NuGetLLVMSharp.Interop22.1.8-449 days ago
NuGetLLVMSharp22.1.8-849 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

64Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 48 days ago
4.2/36Commit cadence — 6/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 100 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 17 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year100
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push48
active_weeks_last_year6
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 16 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 49 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~159.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count16
latest_release_tagv22.1.8
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release49
mean_days_between_releases159.3
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?

70Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
48.3/60Stars — 950 stars
17/25Forks — 112 forks
8.8/15Watchers — 39 watchers
Inputs used
forks112
stars950
watchers39
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
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_badges1
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
57/80Total downloads — 306,848 downloads all-time across nuget
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesLLVMSharp.Interop, LLVMSharp
dependents—
ecosystemsnuget
total_downloads306,848
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?

77Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
8.6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 62% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 18 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 7 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled18
top_contributor_share0.617
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
25.8/30PR acceptance — 117/136 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs117
open_issues0
closed_issues132
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs19
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
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 23,567 followers of dotnet
25/25Track record — 280 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers23,567
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_logindotnet
public_repos280
account_age_days4,393

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 2 package(s) on nuget
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 49 days ago
20/20Version history — 8 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesLLVMSharp.Interop, LLVMSharp
ecosystemsnuget
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish49

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

64Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 7 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsllvm, llvm-bindings, hacktoberfest
has_wikino
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?

55Moderate · 16% of overall
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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 7 out of 7 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
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 7 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 17 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
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
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, 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_packages1
unassessed_packages2
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 1 resolved dependencies against OSV. 2 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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.

75Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — .github/copilot-instructions.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
29.3/40Legible commit history — 55 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.55
agent_instruction_files.github/copilot-instructions.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes9,050
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — samples/KaleidoscopeTutorial/Chapter3/Chapter3.csproj, samples/KaleidoscopeTutorial/Chapter4/Chapter4.csproj, samples/KaleidoscopeTutorial/Chapter5/Chapter5.csproj (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — C# (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 69 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.69
toolchain_manifestssamples/KaleidoscopeTutorial/Chapter3/Chapter3.csproj, samples/KaleidoscopeTutorial/Chapter4/Chapter4.csproj, samples/KaleidoscopeTutorial/Chapter5/Chapter5.csproj, samples/KaleidoscopeTutorial/Chapter6/Chapter6.csproj, samples/KaleidoscopeTutorial/Chapter7/Chapter7.csproj, samples/KaleidoscopeTutorial/Chapter8/Chapter8.csproj, samples/KaleidoscopeTutorial/Chapter9/Chapter9.csproj, samples/KaleidoscopeTutorial/Kaleidoscope.Common/Kaleidoscope.Common.csproj, sources/LLVMSharp.Interop/LLVMSharp.Interop.csproj, sources/LLVMSharp/LLVMSharp.csproj, tests/LLVMSharp.KaleidoscopeTests/LLVMSharp.KaleidoscopeTests.csproj, tests/LLVMSharp.UnitTests/LLVMSharp.UnitTests.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — C# (statically typed)
54.7/55Manageable file sizes — 2/418 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC#
largest_source_bytes459,520
source_files_sampled418
oversized_source_files2
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — samples
Inputs used
example_dirssamples
has_mcp_signalno
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

950GitHub stars
18contributors
100commits, last 12 months
48days since last push
16releases
1bus factor
0open issues
—package ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 112 ⇿
0Stars
112Forks
14Releases

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.

02040608010012010532015-022020-112026-08
Major 2Minor 3Patch 1

Each point covers 11 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 · 2026-10-21 07:36 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests7 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 7 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained17 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
1Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
NuGetlibLLVM—sources/LLVMSharp.Interop/LLVMSharp.Interop.csproj
NuGetlibLLVMSharp—sources/LLVMSharp.Interop/LLVMSharp.Interop.csproj
All dependencies 3

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 1 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
NuGetLibLLVM—direct
NuGetlibLLVMSharp—direct
NuGetMicrosoft.NETCore.Platforms1.0.1indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 1 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 2 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

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 — NuGet.