Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-09 08:32 UTC

dotnet / templating

This repo contains the Template Engine which is used by dotnet new

No license detected★ 1,742 stars⑂ 399 forkssince Jun 2016View on GitHub ↗

dotnet/templating holds a health index of 56 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (67/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (1/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

56
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

56
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 54 is calibrated to 56 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

.NET PlatformOrganization · verified domain
23,337 followers278 public repossince Oct 2014

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?

67Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
1.4/36Commit cadence — 2/52 weeks with commits
7/18Commit volume — 5 commits in the last year
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
commits_last_year5
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year2

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~10.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv10.0.401
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases10.1
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?

58Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
52.6/60Stars — 1,742 stars
21.7/25Forks — 399 forks
11.2/15Watchers — 105 watchers
Inputs used
forks399
stars1,742
watchers105
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
0/22.5License — no license file detected
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseno
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

63Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 80% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.8
How it's scored
40/42Issue resolution — 95% of issues closed
26.2/30PR acceptance — 7,560/8,650 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 6/6 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs7,560
open_issues83
closed_issues1,640
prs_merged_7d4
prs_decided_7d4
prs_merged_30d11
prs_decided_30d11
issue_closed_ratio0.952
closed_unmerged_prs1,090
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d6
first_time_prs_decided_30d6
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 23,337 followers of dotnet
25/25Track record — 278 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers23,337
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_logindotnet
public_repos278
account_age_days4,351

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

44Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://docs.microsoft.com/dotnet/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 2 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsdotnet, dotnet-template
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://docs.microsoft.com/dotnet/
docs_sitehttps://docs.microsoft.com/dotnet/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

47Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5Code-Review — Found 1/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
0/2.5License — license file not detected
0.8/7.5Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
0/5Packaging — no data
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
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate3.4
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_packages10
unassessed_packages29
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 10 resolved dependencies against OSV. 29 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.

1Critical · 4% of overall
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.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
0/8Automated maintenance — no data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

1,742GitHub stars
2contributors
5commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
83open issues
—package ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 399 ⇿
0Stars
399Forks
95Releases

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.

010020030040038972016-082021-082026-08
Major 0Minor 0Patch 72

Each point covers 10 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.4 / 10
3.4aggregate

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 · 2026-09-09 08:32 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 1/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
0Licenselicense file not detected
1Maintained1 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not 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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 39

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 39 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
NuGetAwesomeAssertions—indirect
NuGetDrop.App—indirect
NuGetFakeItEasy—indirect
NuGetJsonSchema.Net—indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore1.0.3indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Mvc1.0.4indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.StaticFiles1.0.1indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Build.Framework—indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Build.Utilities.Core—indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.DotNet.IBCMerge—indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging—indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions—indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Console—indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Debug1.0.1indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.ManifestTool.CrossPlatform—indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk15.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.TemplateEngine.Tasks—indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.VisualStudio.Web.BrowserLink1.0.1indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.VisualStudioEng.MicroBuild.Core—indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.VisualStudioEng.MicroBuild.Plugins.SwixBuild—indirect
NuGetNewtonsoft.Bla.Json13.0.3indirect
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json13.0.3indirect
NuGetNuGet.Configuration—indirect
NuGetNuGet.Credentials—indirect
NuGetNuGet.Frameworks—indirect
NuGetNuGet.Protocol—indirect
NuGetPackageName_SpaceHolder—indirect
NuGetSystem.CommandLine—indirect
NuGetSystem.Text.Json—indirect
NuGetVerify.DiffPlex—indirect
NuGetVerify.Xunit—indirect
NuGetVerify.XunitV3—indirect
NuGetxunit—indirect
NuGetxunit2.2.0indirect
NuGetxunit.abstractions—indirect
NuGetxunit.extensibility.execution—indirect
NuGetxunit.runner.visualstudio2.2.0indirect
NuGetxunit.v3.assert—indirect
NuGetxunit.v3.extensibility.core—indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 10 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 29 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.