Public record
Software health reportschema 0.16.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-20 15:57 UTC

elct9620 / beni

mruby vendoring and build toolchain

Rust · RubyApache-2.0★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Jun 2026View on GitHub ↗

elct9620/beni holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (80/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (30/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

71
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.

71
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 63 is calibrated to 71 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

蒼時弦也Personal account
388 followers332 public repossince Jul 2011@Gogolook-Inc @StarPortal @BasalticStudio

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 publish
RubyGemsbeni0.10.0-132 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

76Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 2 days ago
6.2/36Commit cadence9/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume441 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
Inputs used
commits_last_year441
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year9

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases12 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 2 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~4.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count12
latest_release_tagv0.10.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release2
mean_days_between_releases4.5
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?

30At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars0 stars
0/25Forks0 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
37.2/80Total downloads3,829 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesbeni
dependents
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads3,829
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?

61Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.7/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 97% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth3 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.971
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolutionno issues or no data
30/30PR acceptance13/13 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs13
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
18.6/25Owner reach388 followers of elct9620
25/25Track record332 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers388
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginelct9620
public_repos332
account_age_days5,498
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 2 days ago
20/20Version history13 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesbeni
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish2

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests4 out of 4 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
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscrate, mruby, rust
has_wikino
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

62Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests4 out of 4 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 0/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
0/5Packagingno data
5/5Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
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
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.2
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 advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages71
unassessed_packages4
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 71 resolved dependencies against OSV. 4 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.

80Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsCLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes12,101
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
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock, Gemfile.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
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
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
53.2/55Manageable file sizes2/61 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes160,122
source_files_sampled61
oversized_source_files2

Key facts

0GitHub stars
3contributors
441commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
12releases
1bus factor
0open issues
crates.io, RubyGemspackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.2 / 10
5.2aggregate

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 15:57 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
4Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests4 out of 4 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 0/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
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 5
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsirbGemfile
RubyGemsrake~> 13.0Gemfile
RubyGemsminitest~> 5.16Gemfile
RubyGemsrubocop~> 1.21Gemfile
RubyGemssteep~> 2.0Gemfile
All dependencies 75

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 6 direct and 69 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsirb1.18.0direct
RubyGemsminitest5.27.0direct
RubyGemsrakedirect
RubyGemsrake13.4.2direct
RubyGemsrubocop1.87.0direct
RubyGemssteep2.0.0direct
crates.ioaho-corasick1.1.4indirect
crates.iobeni-sysindirect
crates.iobindgenindirect
crates.iobindgen0.72.1indirect
crates.iobitflags2.12.1indirect
crates.ioccindirect
crates.iocc1.2.63indirect
crates.iocexpr0.6.0indirect
crates.iocfg-if1.0.4indirect
crates.ioclang-sys1.8.1indirect
crates.ioeither1.16.0indirect
crates.iofind-msvc-tools0.1.9indirect
crates.ioglob0.3.3indirect
crates.ioitertools0.13.0indirect
crates.iolibc0.2.186indirect
crates.iolibloading0.8.9indirect
crates.iolog0.4.32indirect
crates.iomemchr2.8.1indirect
crates.iominimal-lexical0.2.1indirect
crates.ionom7.1.3indirect
crates.ioprettyplease0.2.37indirect
crates.ioproc-macro21.0.106indirect
crates.ioquote1.0.45indirect
crates.ioregex1.12.3indirect
crates.ioregex-automata0.4.14indirect
crates.ioregex-syntax0.8.10indirect
crates.iorustc-hash2.1.2indirect
crates.ioshlex1.3.0indirect
crates.ioshlex2.0.1indirect
crates.iosyn2.0.117indirect
crates.iounicode-ident1.0.24indirect
crates.iowindows-link0.2.1indirect
RubyGemsast2.4.3indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.7indirect
RubyGemscsv3.3.5indirect
RubyGemsdate3.5.1indirect
RubyGemserb6.0.4indirect
RubyGemsffi1.17.4indirect
RubyGemsfileutils1.8.0indirect
RubyGemsio-console0.8.2indirect
RubyGemsjson2.19.7indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.5indirect
RubyGemslint_roller1.1.0indirect
RubyGemslisten3.10.0indirect
RubyGemslogger1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsparallel2.1.0indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.11.1indirect
RubyGemspp0.6.3indirect
RubyGemsprettyprint0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsprism1.9.0indirect
RubyGemspsych5.4.0indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrb-fsevent0.11.2indirect
RubyGemsrb-inotify0.11.1indirect
RubyGemsrbs4.0.2indirect
RubyGemsrdoc7.2.0indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.12.0indirect
RubyGemsreline0.6.3indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.49.1indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemssecurerandom0.4.1indirect
RubyGemsstringio3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsstrscan3.1.8indirect
RubyGemsterminal-table4.0.0indirect
RubyGemstsort0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-emoji4.2.0indirect
RubyGemsuri1.1.1indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 71 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 4 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 v0.16.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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