Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-18 22:04 UTC

eznix86 / docker-registry-ui

Yet another docker registry UI

Go · VueAGPL-3.0★ 242 stars⑂ 11 forkssince Sep 2025View on GitHub ↗
KindNetwork serviceWeb interfaceCommand-line toolhow this is determined

eznix86/docker-registry-ui holds a health index of 63 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (78/100) and lowest on Security (31/100). It was last updated 37 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

63
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.

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

Ownership

Bruno BernardPersonal account
150 followers224 public repossince Mar 2017

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
Gogithub.com/eznix86/docker-registry-uiv1.6.0-3137 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

68Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 37 days ago
9.7/36Commit cadence14/52 weeks with commits
16.8/18Commit volume74 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained6 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year74
human_commit_share0.78
days_since_last_push37
active_weeks_last_year14
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases35 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 37 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~7.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count35
latest_release_tagdocker-registry-ui-1.6.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release37
mean_days_between_releases7.6

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

48Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
38.6/60Stars242 stars
8.3/25Forks11 forks
0/15Watchers1 watchers
Inputs used
forks11
stars242
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (AGPL-3.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
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?

59Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.5/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 98% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth3 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.979
How it's scored
40.4/42Issue resolution96% of issues closed
24.9/30PR acceptance58/70 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs58
open_issues1
closed_issues26
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.963
closed_unmerged_prs12
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
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
15.7/25Owner reach150 followers of eznix86
25/25Track record224 public repos, account ~9 yr old
Inputs used
followers150
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_logineznix86
public_repos224
account_age_days3,469
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 go
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 37 days ago
20/20Version history31 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/eznix86/docker-registry-ui
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish37

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

78Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.golangci.yml, eslint.config.js
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics8 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsdocker, kubernetes, registry, registry-ui, docker-registry-ui, bunjs, golang, vuejs
has_wikiyes
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?

31At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
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
7.5/7.5Maintained6 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities13 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate3.1

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.

69Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history78 of 78 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapTaskfile.yml, mise.toml
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.golangci.yml, eslint.config.js
11/11Static type checkingtsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance22 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesTaskfile.yml, mise.toml
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0.22
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeGo (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/53 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes20,974
source_files_sampled53
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

242GitHub stars
3contributors
74commits, last 12 months
37days since last push
35releases
1bus factor
1open issues
Go, npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 11 ⇿
0Stars
11Forks
34Releases

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.

048121122025-092026-022026-08
Major 1Minor 7Patch 12
OpenSSF Scorecard 3.1 / 10
3.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-18 22:04 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
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
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained6 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
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities13 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 29
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/caarlos0/env/v11v11.4.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/charmbracelet/logv1.0.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/coreos/go-oidc/v3v3.18.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/eznix86/registry-clientv0.7.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/go-chi/chi/v5v5.3.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/gorilla/securecookiev1.1.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/gorilla/websocketv1.5.3go.mod
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/go-versionv1.9.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/joho/godotenvv1.5.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-sqlite3v1.14.44go.mod
Gogithub.com/romsar/gonertia/v3v3.0.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/pflagv1.0.10go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/modv0.36.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/oauth2v0.36.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/syncv0.20.0go.mod
npm@formkit/auto-animate^0.9.0package.json
npm@headlessui/vue^1.7.23package.json
npm@inertiajs/vite^3.6.1package.json
npm@inertiajs/vue3^3.6.1package.json
npm@vueuse/core^14.3.0package.json
npmecharts^6.1.0package.json
npmhighlight.js^11.11.1package.json
npmpinia^3.0.4package.json
npmsemver^7.8.5package.json
npmtailwind-merge^3.6.0package.json
npmtailwind-variants^3.2.2package.json
npmvue^3.5.40package.json
npmvue-echarts^8.0.1package.json
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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 statisticsGo.