Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-28 12:41 UTC

finbourne / finbourne-sdk-python

PythonNo license detected★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Mar 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined

finbourne/finbourne-sdk-python holds a health index of 38 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (62/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (24/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

38
overall / 100
Weak

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.

38
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 42 is calibrated to 38 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

FINBOURNEOrganization · verified domain
42 followers147 public repossince Sep 2016

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIfinbourne-sdk0.1.1236,78610210 days agomerged-openapi-specificationopenapiopenapi-generatorfinbourne-sdk

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

49Weak · 21% of overall

Development activity

81Excellent
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
17.3/36Commit cadence — 25/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 103 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year103
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year25

Release discipline

1Critical
How it's scored
0/27Ships releases — no releases published
0/36Release recency — no releases
0/27Release cadence — no releases
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count0
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?

25At Risk · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

1Critical
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 0 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

25At Risk
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
0/22.5License — no license file detected
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseno
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

64Moderate
How it's scored
51.1/80Monthly downloads — 6,786 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesfinbourne-sdk
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads6,786
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?

62Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

10Critical
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1

Issue & PR responsiveness

67Good
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
30/30PR acceptance — 2/2 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs2
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

87Excellent
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
11.7/25Owner reach — 42 followers of finbourne
25/25Track record — 147 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers42
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginfinbourne
public_repos147
account_age_days3,660

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 10 days ago
20/20Version history — 102 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesfinbourne-sdk
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish10

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

24At Risk · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

20At Risk
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
0/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.pylint])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

30At Risk
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionno

Security

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

46Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

33At Risk
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
0/2.5CI-Tests — no data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
0/2.5License — license file not detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate3.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages21
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:finbourne-sdk@0.1.123 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 21 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.

31At Risk · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — 0 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

36Weak
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.pylint])
11/11Static type checking — finbourne/sdk/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsfinbourne/sdk/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

80Excellent
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (finbourne/sdk/py.typed)
52.8/55Manageable file sizes — 107/2,709 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes1,046,115
source_files_sampled2,709
oversized_source_files107

Key facts

0GitHub stars
1contributors
103commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
0releases
1bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.3 / 10
3.3aggregate

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 · 2026-09-28 12:41 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
0Licenselicense file not detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 7
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIurllib3==2.7.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-dateutil==2.9.0.post0pyproject.toml
PyPIrequests==2.34.2pyproject.toml
PyPIaiohttp==3.14.3pyproject.toml
PyPIpydantic==2.13.4pyproject.toml
PyPIaenum==3.1.17pyproject.toml
PyPItyping_extensions>=4.6.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 37

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 30 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaenum3.1.17direct
PyPIaiohttp3.14.3direct
PyPIpydantic2.13.4direct
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0direct
PyPIrequests2.34.2direct
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0direct
PyPIurllib32.7.0direct
PyPIaiohappyeyeballs2.7.1indirect
PyPIaiosignal1.4.0indirect
PyPIannotated-types0.8.0indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.7.22indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.5.1indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIfinbourne-sdk0.1.129indirect
PyPIflake84.0.1indirect
PyPIfrozenlist1.8.0indirect
PyPIidna3.20indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPImccabe0.6.1indirect
PyPImultidict6.9.1indirect
PyPInodeenv1.11.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.3indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpropcache0.5.4indirect
PyPIpycodestyle2.8.0indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.46.4indirect
PyPIpyflakes2.4.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.21.0indirect
PyPIpyright1.1.411indirect
PyPIpytest9.0.3indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio0.21.0indirect
PyPIruff0.15.12indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.4indirect
PyPIxeger0.4.0indirect
PyPIyarl1.25.1indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:finbourne-sdk@0.1.123 pulls in 21 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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with finbourne/finbourne-sdk-python. Read them side by side →

92fingerprintjs/python-sdkPython SDK for Fingerprint Server APIExcellent88counterfact/api-simulatorTurn an OpenAPI spec into a local API in one command. Build and test your frontend with custom responses, shared state, and simulated failures, without waiting for the backend.Excellent86lance-format/lance-namespaceLance Namespace is an open specification for describing access and operations against a collection of tables in a multimodal lakehouseExcellent84tfranzel/drf-spectacularSane and flexible OpenAPI 3 schema generation for Django REST framework.Excellent81elliottech/lighter-pythonPublic Python SDK for LighterExcellent96OpenAPITools/openapi-generatorOpenAPI Generator allows generation of API client libraries (SDK generation), server stubs, documentation and configuration automatically given an OpenAPI Spec (v2, v3)Exceptional

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.