Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-27 13:31 UTC

drivendataorg / cloudpathlib

Python pathlib-style classes for cloud storage services such as Amazon S3, Azure Blob Storage, and Google Cloud Storage.

PythonMIT★ 627 stars⑂ 88 forkssince Jul 2020View on GitHub ↗

drivendataorg/cloudpathlib holds a health index of 88 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (85/100) and lowest on Security (54/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

88
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.

88
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 74 is calibrated to 88 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

DrivenDataOrganization
568 followers149 public repossince Nov 2014

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIcloudpathlib0.25.027,028,861394 days agopathlibcloud-storages3azure-blob-storagegoogle-cloud-storage

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

75Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 4 days ago
6.9/36Commit cadence — 10/52 weeks with commits
11.3/18Commit volume — 17 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 10 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year17
human_commit_share0.99
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year10
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 39 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 4 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~101 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count39
latest_release_tagv0.25.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release4
mean_days_between_releases101
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?

84Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
45.4/60Stars — 627 stars
16.2/25Forks — 88 forks
4.3/15Watchers — 7 watchers
Inputs used
forks88
stars627
watchers7
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges6
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicescodecov.io, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 27,028,861 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagescloudpathlib
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads27,028,861
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?

69Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
9.4/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 58% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 15 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled15
top_contributor_share0.584
How it's scored
30.9/42Issue resolution — 74% of issues closed
26.5/30PR acceptance — 217/246 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 4/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs217
open_issues86
closed_issues240
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio0.736
closed_unmerged_prs29
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
19.8/25Owner reach — 568 followers of drivendataorg
25/25Track record — 149 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers568
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_logindrivendataorg
public_repos149
account_age_days4,315

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 4 days ago
20/20Version history — 39 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagescloudpathlib
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish4

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

83Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.black]), setup.cfg ([flake8])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
14/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 17 out of 24 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://cloudpathlib.drivendata.org
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspython, s3, azure-blob, pathlib, cloud-storage, google-cloud-storage
has_wikino
homepagehttps://cloudpathlib.drivendata.org
docs_sitehttps://cloudpathlib.drivendata.org
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

54Moderate · 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
1.8/2.5CI-Tests — 17 out of 24 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 4/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 4 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 — 10 commit(s) and 6 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
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate5.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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.

85Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 82 of 99 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.828
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes5,371
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.black]), setup.cfg ([flake8])
11/11Static type checking — cloudpathlib/py.typed
0/10Reproducible environment
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 11 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 1 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
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configscloudpathlib/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.11
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.01
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (cloudpathlib/py.typed)
54.1/55Manageable file sizes — 1/64 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes67,071
source_files_sampled64
oversized_source_files1
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 — notebooks
Inputs used
example_dirsnotebooks
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

627GitHub stars
15contributors
17commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
39releases
1bus factor
86open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 88 ⇿
0Stars
88Forks
36Releases

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.

0204060801008832020-102023-092026-08
Major 0Minor 23Patch 13

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.4 / 10
5.4aggregate

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 · 2026-08-27 13:30 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
7CI-Tests17 out of 24 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 4/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained10 commit(s) and 6 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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPItyping-extensions>4pyproject.toml
All dependencies 42

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 41 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPItyping-extensions—direct
PyPIazure-identity—indirect
PyPIazure-storage-blob—indirect
PyPIazure-storage-file-datalake—indirect
PyPIblack—indirect
PyPIboto3—indirect
PyPIbotocore—indirect
PyPIbuild—indirect
PyPIflake8—indirect
PyPIflit-core—indirect
PyPIipytest—indirect
PyPIipython—indirect
PyPIjupyter—indirect
PyPIloguru—indirect
PyPImatplotlib—indirect
PyPImike—indirect
PyPImkdocs—indirect
PyPImkdocs-jupyter—indirect
PyPImkdocs-material—indirect
PyPImkdocstrings—indirect
PyPImypy—indirect
PyPInbautoexport—indirect
PyPIpandas—indirect
PyPIpillow—indirect
PyPIpsutil—indirect
PyPIpydantic—indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest-cases—indirect
PyPIpytest-cov—indirect
PyPIpytest-duration-insights—indirect
PyPIpytest-reportlog—indirect
PyPIpytest-rerunfailures—indirect
PyPIpytest-xdist—indirect
PyPIpython-dotenv—indirect
PyPIpywin32—indirect
PyPIrich—indirect
PyPIshortuuid—indirect
PyPItabulate—indirect
PyPItenacity—indirect
PyPItqdm—indirect
PyPItyper—indirect
PyPIwheel—indirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

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.