Public record
Software health reportschema 0.15.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-20 13:17 UTC

dry-rb / dry-struct

Typed struct and value objects

RubyMIT★ 441 stars⑂ 67 forkssince Jun 2016View on GitHub ↗

dry-rb/dry-struct holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (81/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (33/100). It was last updated 77 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

80
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.

80
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

DryOrganization
382 followers41 public repossince Mar 2015

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemsdry-struct1.8.1-26139 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

60Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 77 days ago
13.2/36Commit cadence19/52 weeks with commits
15.3/18Commit volume49 commits in the last year
4/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
commits_last_year49
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push77
active_weeks_last_year19
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases21 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 139 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~245.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count21
latest_release_tagv1.8.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release139
mean_days_between_releases245.9
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?

81Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
42.9/60Stars441 stars
15.2/25Forks67 forks
7.4/15Watchers22 watchers
Inputs used
forks67
stars441
watchers22
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Total downloads58,638,063 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesdry-struct
dependents
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads58,638,063
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?

75Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
9.4/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 58% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth34 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 27 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled34
top_contributor_share0.583
How it's scored
41.5/42Issue resolution99% of issues closed
25.6/30PR acceptance93/109 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 1/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs93
open_issues1
closed_issues89
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.989
closed_unmerged_prs16
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.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
18.6/25Owner reach382 followers of dry-rb
23.8/25Track record41 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers382
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_logindry-rb
public_repos41
account_age_days4,157
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 139 days ago
20/20Version history26 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesdry-struct
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish139

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests2 out of 2 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
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://dry-rb.org/gems/dry-struct
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics9 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsdry-rb, data-modeling, type-safety, data, ruby, types, constraints, struct, value-object
has_wikino
homepagehttps://dry-rb.org/gems/dry-struct
docs_sitehttps://dry-rb.org/gems/dry-struct
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
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-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests2 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 1/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 27 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
3/7.5Maintained5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
0/5Packagingno data
3.5/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 7
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
6.8/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate5.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, 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.

33At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno 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
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
7/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
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.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeRuby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/41 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes14,673
source_files_sampled41
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

441GitHub stars
34contributors
49commits, last 12 months
77days since last push
21releases
1bus factor
1open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

More detail

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 · 2026-07-20 13:16 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-Tests2 out of 2 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 1/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 27 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
4Maintained5 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
7Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 7
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 7
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsactiverecordGemfile
RubyGemsattrioGemfile
RubyGemsbenchmark-ipsGemfile
RubyGemsfast_attributesGemfile
RubyGemssqlite3Gemfile
RubyGemsvirtusGemfile
RubyGemsdebugGemfile
All dependencies 17

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 10 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsactiverecorddirect
RubyGemsattriodirect
RubyGemsbenchmark-ipsdirect
RubyGemsdebugdirect
RubyGemsfast_attributesdirect
RubyGemssqlite3direct
RubyGemsvirtusdirect
RubyGemsbundlerindirect
RubyGemsdry-coreindirect
RubyGemsdry-monadsindirect
RubyGemsdry-typesindirect
RubyGemsice_nineindirect
RubyGemsrakeindirect
RubyGemsrspecindirect
RubyGemssuper_diffindirect
RubyGemsyardindirect
RubyGemszeitwerkindirect
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 v0.15.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsRubyGems.