Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-26 23:42 UTC

firecow / gitlab-ci-local

Tired of pushing to test your .gitlab-ci.yml?

TypeScriptMIT★ 4,098 stars⑂ 216 forkssince Jan 2020View on GitHub ↗

KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

#gitlab #local #pipeline #git #ci #cd #push #untracked #uncomitted #gitlab-ci

firecow/gitlab-ci-local holds a health index of 91 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (91/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (64/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

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.

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)

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 77 is calibrated to 91 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Mads Jon NielsenPersonal account

50 followers13 public repossince Aug 2011Cego A/S

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish	Tags
npm	gitlab-ci-local	4.75.1	60,285	129	32 days ago	git gitlab pipeline local ci cd push untracked uncomitted gitlab-ci

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

91Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

86Excellent

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 1 days ago
22.2/36	Commit cadence — 32/52 weeks with commits
18/18	Commit volume — 185 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 14 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	185
human_commit_share	0.56
days_since_last_push	1
active_weeks_last_year	32

Release discipline

98Exceptional

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 32 days ago
27/27	Release cadence — a release every ~19.1 days
8/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — 5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.

Inputs used

releases_count	100
latest_release_tag	4.75.1
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	32
mean_days_between_releases	19.1

Community & Adoption

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

72Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

86Excellent

How it's scored

58.6/60	Stars — 4,098 stars
19.4/25	Forks — 216 forks
7.7/15	Watchers — 25 watchers

Inputs used

forks	216
stars	4,098
watchers	25
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

50Moderate

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	12
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	shields.io, snyk.io, sonarcloud.io
has_pull_request_template	no

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

80Excellent

How it's scored

63.7/80	Monthly downloads — 60,285 downloads/month across npm
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	gitlab-ci-local
dependents	—
ecosystems	npm
total_downloads	—
monthly_downloads	60,285
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?

64Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

37Weak

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.9/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 78% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 90 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 6 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	90
top_contributor_share	0.782

Issue & PR responsiveness

78Good

How it's scored

39.7/42	Issue resolution — 94% of issues closed
21.3/30	PR acceptance — 848/1,193 decided PRs merged
13/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — 2/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
4.5/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 7/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3

Inputs used

merged_prs	848
open_issues	38
closed_issues	659
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	3
prs_decided_30d	3
issue_closed_ratio	0.945
closed_unmerged_prs	345
first_time_authors_30d	2
first_time_prs_merged_30d	2
first_time_prs_decided_30d	2

Ownership & stewardship

53Moderate

How it's scored

10/30	Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20	Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
12.3/25	Owner reach — 50 followers of firecow
20.3/25	Track record — 13 public repos, account ~15 yr old

Inputs used

followers	50
owner_type	User
is_verified	—
owner_login	firecow
public_repos	13
account_age_days	5,525

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 32 days ago
20/20	Version history — 129 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	gitlab-ci-local
ecosystems	npm
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	32

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

79Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

82Excellent

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — eslint.config.mjs
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
18/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 28 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	yes
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

75Good

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
0/15	Documentation / homepage site
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 10 topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	gitlab, local, pipeline, git, ci, cd, push, untracked, uncomitted, gitlab-ci
has_wiki	no
homepage	—
docs_site	—
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	yes
has_description	yes

Security

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

76Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

70Good

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — no data
2.2/2.5	CI-Tests — 28 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5	Code-Review — Found 7/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 6 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 14 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5	Packaging — packaging workflow detected
2/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 4
4.5/5	SAST — SAST tool detected but not run on all commits
2/5	Security-Policy — security policy file detected
6/7.5	Signed-Releases — 5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6.8/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 1 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	17
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	1
scorecard_aggregate	7

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	1
affected_packages	1
assessed_packages	96
unassessed_packages	42
affected_by_severity	moderate 1
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 96 resolved dependencies against OSV. 42 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.

86Excellent · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

85Excellent

How it's scored

45/45	Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40	Legible commit history — 54 of 56 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.964
agent_instruction_files	CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes	1,803

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

76Good

How it's scored

0/18	One-command bootstrap
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — eslint.config.mjs
11/11	Static type checking — tsconfig.json
10/10	Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
10/10	Demonstrated agent practice — 7 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8	Automated maintenance — 44 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
4/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 4

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	composer.lock, package-lock.json
has_dockerfile	yes
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	—
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share	0.07
toolchain_manifests	—
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.44

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
54.7/55	Manageable file sizes — 1/207 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	TypeScript
largest_source_bytes	81,505
source_files_sampled	207
oversized_source_files	1

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional

How it's scored

0/40	API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20	MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40	Runnable examples — examples

Inputs used

example_dirs	examples
has_mcp_signal	no
api_schema_files	—
interfaces_expected_of	—

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

4,098GitHub stars

90contributors

185commits, last 12 months

1days since last push

100releases

1bus factor

38open issues

npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 216 ⇿

0Stars

216Forks

100Releases

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.

Major 0Minor 56Patch 44

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.0 / 10

7.0aggregate

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 · 2026-09-26 23:42 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
n/a	Branch-Protection	internal 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
9	CI-Tests	28 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3	Code-Review	Found 7/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
10	Contributors	project has 6 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	30 commit(s) and 14 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10	Packaging	packaging workflow detected
4	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 4
9	SAST	SAST tool detected but not run on all commits
4	Security-Policy	security policy file detected
8	Signed-Releases	5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
9	Vulnerabilities	1 existing vulnerabilities detected

All dependencies 138

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 138 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
npm	@eslint/js	`10.x`	indirect
npm	@stylistic/eslint-plugin	`5.x`	indirect
npm	@types/base64url	`2.x.x`	indirect
npm	@types/bun	`1.x.x`	indirect
npm	@types/checksum	`0.1.x`	indirect
npm	@types/deep-extend	`0.6.x`	indirect
npm	@types/fs-extra	`11.x.x`	indirect
npm	@types/micromatch	`4.x.x`	indirect
npm	@types/pretty-hrtime	`1.x.x`	indirect
npm	@types/semver	`7.x.x`	indirect
npm	@types/split2	`4.x.x`	indirect
npm	@types/yargs	`17.x.x`	indirect
npm	@vitest/coverage-v8	`^5.0.0`	indirect
npm	accepts	`2.0.0`	indirect
npm	ajv	`8.x.x`	indirect
npm	axios	`1.x.x`	indirect
npm	axios-mock-adapter	`2.x`	indirect
npm	base64url	`3.x.x`	indirect
npm	body-parser	`2.3.0`	indirect
npm	bytes	`3.1.2`	indirect
npm	call-bind-apply-helpers	`1.0.2`	indirect
npm	call-bound	`1.0.4`	indirect
npm	camelcase	`9.x.x`	indirect
npm	chalk	`6.x`	indirect
npm	chalk-template	`1.x.x`	indirect
npm	checksum	`1.x.x`	indirect
npm	content-disposition	`1.1.0`	indirect
npm	content-type	`1.0.5`	indirect
npm	content-type	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	cookie	`0.7.1`	indirect
npm	cookie-signature	`1.2.2`	indirect
npm	debug	`4.4.3`	indirect
npm	deep-extend	`0.6.x`	indirect
npm	depcheck	`1.x.x`	indirect
npm	depd	`2.0.0`	indirect
npm	dotenv	`17.x`	indirect
npm	dunder-proto	`1.0.1`	indirect
npm	ee-first	`1.1.1`	indirect
npm	encodeurl	`2.0.0`	indirect
npm	es-define-property	`1.0.1`	indirect
npm	es-errors	`1.3.0`	indirect
npm	es-object-atoms	`1.1.2`	indirect
npm	escape-html	`1.0.3`	indirect
npm	eslint	`10.x`	indirect
npm	etag	`1.8.1`	indirect
npm	execa	`10.x`	indirect
npm	express	`5.2.1`	indirect
npm	finalhandler	`2.1.1`	indirect
npm	forwarded	`0.2.0`	indirect
npm	fresh	`2.0.0`	indirect
npm	fs-extra	`11.x.x`	indirect
npm	function-bind	`1.1.2`	indirect
npm	get-intrinsic	`1.3.0`	indirect
npm	get-proto	`1.0.1`	indirect
npm	globby	`16.x.x`	indirect
npm	gopd	`1.2.0`	indirect
npm	has-symbols	`1.1.0`	indirect
npm	hasown	`2.0.4`	indirect
npm	http-errors	`2.0.1`	indirect
npm	iconv-lite	`0.7.3`	indirect
npm	inherits	`2.0.4`	indirect
npm	ipaddr.js	`1.9.1`	indirect
npm	is-promise	`4.0.0`	indirect
npm	js-yaml	`5.x`	indirect
npm	jsonpointer	`5.x.x`	indirect
npm	math-intrinsics	`1.1.0`	indirect
npm	media-typer	`1.1.1`	indirect
npm	merge-descriptors	`2.0.0`	indirect
npm	micromatch	`4.x.x`	indirect
npm	mime-db	`1.54.0`	indirect
npm	mime-types	`3.0.2`	indirect
npm	ms	`2.1.3`	indirect
npm	negotiator	`1.1.0`	indirect
npm	npm-check-updates	`18.0.1`	indirect
npm	object-inspect	`1.13.4`	indirect
npm	object-traversal	`1.x.x`	indirect
npm	on-finished	`2.4.1`	indirect
npm	once	`1.4.0`	indirect
npm	p-map	`7.x.x`	indirect
npm	parseurl	`1.3.3`	indirect
npm	path-to-regexp	`8.4.2`	indirect
npm	pretty-hrtime	`1.x.x`	indirect
npm	proxy-addr	`2.0.7`	indirect
npm	qs	`6.16.0`	indirect
npm	range-parser	`1.3.0`	indirect
npm	raw-body	`3.0.2`	indirect
npm	re2js	`2.x`	indirect
npm	router	`2.2.0`	indirect
npm	safer-buffer	`2.1.2`	indirect
npm	semver	`7.x.x`	indirect
npm	send	`1.2.1`	indirect
npm	serve-static	`2.2.1`	indirect
npm	setprototypeof	`1.2.0`	indirect
npm	side-channel	`1.1.1`	indirect
npm	side-channel-list	`1.0.1`	indirect
npm	side-channel-map	`1.0.1`	indirect
npm	side-channel-weakmap	`1.0.2`	indirect
npm	split2	`4.x.x`	indirect
npm	statuses	`2.0.2`	indirect
npm	terminal-link	`5.x.x`	indirect
npm	toidentifier	`1.0.1`	indirect
npm	type-is	`2.1.0`	indirect
npm	typescript	`6.x`	indirect
npm	typescript-eslint	`8.x.x`	indirect
npm	unpipe	`1.0.0`	indirect
npm	vary	`1.1.2`	indirect
npm	vitest	`^5.0.0`	indirect
npm	wrappy	`1.0.2`	indirect
npm	yargs	`18.x`	indirect
Packagist	composer/semver	`3.2.4`	indirect
Packagist	composer/xdebug-handler	`1.4.5`	indirect
Packagist	doctrine/annotations	`1.12.1`	indirect
Packagist	doctrine/lexer	`1.2.1`	indirect
Packagist	friendsofphp/php-cs-fixer	`2.18.2`	indirect
Packagist	php-cs-fixer/diff	`1.3.1`	indirect
Packagist	psr/container	`1.1.1`	indirect
Packagist	psr/event-dispatcher	`1.0.0`	indirect
Packagist	psr/log	`1.1.3`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/console	`5.2.4`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/deprecation-contracts	`2.2.0`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/event-dispatcher	`5.2.4`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/event-dispatcher-contracts	`2.2.0`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/filesystem	`5.2.4`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/finder	`5.2.4`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/options-resolver	`5.2.4`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/polyfill-ctype	`1.22.1`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/polyfill-intl-grapheme	`1.22.1`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/polyfill-intl-normalizer	`1.22.1`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/polyfill-mbstring	`1.22.1`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/polyfill-php70	`1.20.0`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/polyfill-php72	`1.22.1`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/polyfill-php73	`1.22.1`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/polyfill-php80	`1.33.0`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/process	`5.4.51`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/service-contracts	`2.2.0`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/stopwatch	`5.2.4`	indirect
Packagist	symfony/string	`5.2.4`	indirect
Packagist	ua-parser/uap-php	`3.7.0`	indirect

Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 96 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 42 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
ua-parser/uap-php	`3.7.0`	indirect	moderate	1	`3.8.0`

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.

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 — npm.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records