Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 15:32 UTC

fluttergen / flutter_gen

The Flutter code generator for your assets, fonts, colors, … — Get rid of all String-based APIs.

DartMIT★ 1,579 stars⑂ 182 forkssince Aug 2020View on GitHub ↗
#dart#flutter#code-generator#templates#assets#fonts#swiftgen#fluttergen

fluttergen/flutter_gen holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (83/100) and lowest on Security (25/100). 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

FlutterGenOrganization
19 followers4 public repossince Aug 2020

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

79Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

71Good
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 2 days ago
13.2/36Commit cadence — 19/52 weeks with commits
14.8/18Commit volume — 44 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — no data
Inputs used
commits_last_year44
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year19

Release discipline

92Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 59 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 3 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~71.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count59
latest_release_tagv5.15.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release3
mean_days_between_releases71.5

Community & Adoption

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

83Excellent · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

76Good
How it's scored
51.9/60Stars — 1,579 stars
18.8/25Forks — 182 forks
5.8/15Watchers — 12 watchers
Inputs used
forks182
stars1,579
watchers12
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
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_badges—
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateyes

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)

37Weak
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
10.4/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 54% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 46 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — no data
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled46
top_contributor_share0.537

Issue & PR responsiveness

85Excellent
How it's scored
36.9/42Issue resolution — 88% of issues closed
24/30PR acceptance — 450/562 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — no data
Inputs used
merged_prs450
open_issues25
closed_issues182
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.879
closed_unmerged_prs112
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

70Good
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
9.4/25Owner reach — 19 followers of FlutterGen
16.9/25Track record — 4 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers19
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified—
owner_loginFlutterGen
public_repos4
account_age_days2,156
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

62Moderate · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

60Moderate
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

65Good
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://pub.dev/packages/flutter_gen
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 8 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsdart, flutter, code-generator, templates, assets, fonts, swiftgen, fluttergen
has_wikino
homepagehttps://pub.dev/packages/flutter_gen
docs_sitehttps://pub.dev/packages/flutter_gen
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

25At Risk · 16% of overall

Security posture

25At Risk
How it's scored
0/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
0/25Dependabot config
25/25Dependency lockfiles — pnpm-lock.yaml
0/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfilespnpm-lock.yaml
manifestspackage.json
has_codeql_workflowno
has_security_policyno
has_dependabot_configno

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.

54Moderate · 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 — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

60Moderate
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Dart (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
0/8Automated maintenance — no data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespnpm-lock.yaml
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
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.

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Dart (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/117 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageDart
largest_source_bytes20,738
source_files_sampled117
oversized_source_files0

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — example, examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexample, examples
has_mcp_signalno
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

1,579GitHub stars
46contributors
44commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
59releases
1bus factor
25open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • OpenSSF Scorecard timed out after 240s; skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

All dependencies 41

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 41 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmansi-escapes7.3.0indirect
npmansi-regex6.2.2indirect
npmansi-styles6.2.3indirect
npmcli-cursor5.0.0indirect
npmcli-truncate5.2.0indirect
npmdetect-indent7.0.2indirect
npmdetect-newline4.0.1indirect
npmemoji-regex10.6.0indirect
npmenvironment1.1.0indirect
npmeventemitter35.0.4indirect
npmfdir6.5.0indirect
npmget-east-asian-width1.5.0indirect
npmgit-hooks-list4.1.1indirect
npmhusky8.0.3indirect
npmis-fullwidth-code-point5.1.0indirect
npmis-plain-obj4.1.0indirect
npmlint-staged17.0.7indirect
npmlistr210.2.1indirect
npmlog-update6.1.0indirect
npmmimic-function5.0.1indirect
npmonetime7.0.0indirect
npmpicomatch4.0.4indirect
npmprettier3.8.1indirect
npmprettier-plugin-packagejson3.0.0indirect
npmrestore-cursor5.1.0indirect
npmrfdc1.4.1indirect
npmsemver7.7.4indirect
npmsignal-exit4.1.0indirect
npmslice-ansi7.1.2indirect
npmslice-ansi8.0.0indirect
npmsort-object-keys2.1.0indirect
npmsort-package-json3.6.0indirect
npmstring-argv0.3.2indirect
npmstring-width7.2.0indirect
npmstring-width8.2.0indirect
npmstrip-ansi7.2.0indirect
npmtinyexec1.2.4indirect
npmtinyglobby0.2.15indirect
npmwrap-ansi10.0.0indirect
npmwrap-ansi9.0.2indirect
npmyaml2.9.0indirect
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 fluttergen/flutter_gen. Read them side by side →

92fzyzcjy/flutter_rust_bridgeFlutter/Dart <-> Rust binding generator, feature-rich, but seamless and simple.Excellent92docmd-io/docmdDocumentation compiler for humans and machines. One Markdown source to website, search, AI context, and knowledge formats together.Excellent90juliansteenbakker/mobile_scannerA universal Flutter barcode and QR code scanner using CameraX/ML Kit for Android, AVFoundation/Apple Vision for iOS & macOS, and ZXing for web.Excellent90lichess-org/mobileLichess mobile appExcellent86LinwoodDev/Butterfly🎨 Powerful, minimalistic, cross-platform, opensource note-taking appExcellent73defuj/opencode-agent-kitAgent for Software Developer Team (opencode)Good

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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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