Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-27 14:44 UTC

fatiando / pooch

A friend to fetch your data files

PythonCustom license★ 736 stars⑂ 90 forkssince Jul 2018View on GitHub ↗

fatiando/pooch holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (86/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (52/100). It was last updated 22 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

86
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.

86
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 72 is calibrated to 86 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Fatiando a TerraOrganization · verified domain
255 followers49 public repossince Jul 2014

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIpooch1.9.016,751,90335208 days agodatadownloadcachinghttp

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

59Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recencylast push 22 days ago
9.7/36Commit cadence14/52 weeks with commits
14.1/18Commit volume36 commits in the last year
4/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained4 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
commits_last_year36
human_commit_share0.66
days_since_last_push22
active_weeks_last_year14
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases29 releases published
16.2/36Release recencylatest release 208 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~188.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count29
latest_release_tagv1.9.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release208
mean_days_between_releases188.5
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?

83Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
46.5/60Stars736 stars
16.2/25Forks90 forks
6.2/15Watchers14 watchers
Inputs used
forks90
stars736
watchers14
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

86Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5Licenselicense file present, not a recognized license
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_badges5
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads16,751,903 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagespooch
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads16,751,903
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?

73Good · 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 breadth47 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 53 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled47
top_contributor_share0.583
How it's scored
33/42Issue resolution78% of issues closed
28.2/30PR acceptance338/359 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 6/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs338
open_issues38
closed_issues139
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.785
closed_unmerged_prs21
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
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
20/20Verified domain
17.3/25Owner reach255 followers of fatiando
24.4/25Track record49 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers255
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginfatiando
public_repos49
account_age_days4,425
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
26/35Publish recencylatest publish 208 days ago
20/20Version history35 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespooch
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish208

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

86Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.flake8, pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests30 out of 30 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

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://www.fatiando.org/pooch
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics9 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspython, python3, scipy, scipy-stack, fatiando-a-terra, data, http, ftp, download-manager
has_wikino
homepagehttps://www.fatiando.org/pooch
docs_sitehttps://www.fatiando.org/pooch
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

64Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests30 out of 30 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
3/7.5Code-ReviewFound 6/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 53 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5Licenselicense file detected
3/7.5Maintained4 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0.5/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
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_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate5.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages7
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the pypi:pooch@1.9.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 7 packages. 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.

52Moderate · 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 history66 of 66 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 bootstrapMakefile, doc/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.flake8, pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance34 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile, doc/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.34
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/17 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes43,130
source_files_sampled17
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

736GitHub stars
47contributors
36commits, last 12 months
22days since last push
29releases
1bus factor
38open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 90 ⇿
0Stars
90Forks
29Releases

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.

0204060801009022018-072022-072026-07
Major 1Minor 15Patch 12

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.5 / 10
5.5aggregate

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 14:43 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4Code-ReviewFound 6/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
10Contributorsproject has 53 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
4Maintained4 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
1Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
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 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIplatformdirs>= 2.5.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpackaging>= 20.0pyproject.toml
PyPIrequests>= 2.19.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 24

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 21 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIpackagingdirect
PyPIplatformdirsdirect
PyPIrequestsdirect
PyPIbuildindirect
PyPIburocrataindirect
PyPIcoverageindirect
PyPImypyindirect
PyPIparamikoindirect
PyPIpytestindirect
PyPIpytest-covindirect
PyPIpytest-httpserverindirect
PyPIpytest-localftpserverindirect
PyPIruffindirect
PyPIsetuptoolsindirect
PyPIsetuptools-scmindirect
PyPIsphinxindirect
PyPIsphinx-book-themeindirect
PyPIsphinx-designindirect
PyPItqdmindirect
PyPItypes-paramikoindirect
PyPItypes-requestsindirect
PyPItypes-tqdmindirect
PyPItypes-xxhashindirect
PyPIxxhashindirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:pooch@1.9.0 pulls in 7 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

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 statisticsPyPI.