Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-09 09:04 UTC

frenck / python-pvoutput

Asynchronous client for the PVOutput API

PythonMIT★ 3 stars⑂ 1 forksince Dec 2021View on GitHub ↗

frenck/python-pvoutput holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (93/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (53/100). It was last updated today. 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

Franck NijhofPersonal account
5,037 followers157 public repossince Feb 2010@home-assistant @hassio-addons

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 publishTags
PyPIpvo4.0.034,339120 days agoapiasyncclientenergyhome-assistantphotovoltaicpvpvoutputsolarsolar-energy

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

93Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
34.6/36Commit cadence — 50/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 255 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_year255
human_commit_share0.02
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year50
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 12 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~189.8 days
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — 3 out of the last 3 releases have a total of 3 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count12
latest_release_tagv4.0.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases189.8

Community & Adoption

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

53Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
4.9/60Stars — 3 stars
0/25Forks — 1 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars3
watchers2
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_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
60.5/80Monthly downloads — 34,339 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagespvo
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads34,339
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?

60Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.8/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 97% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.966
How it's scored
21/42Issue resolution — 50% of issues closed
29.6/30PR acceptance — 1,396/1,413 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/2 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs1,396
open_issues1
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio0.5
closed_unmerged_prs17
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 backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
25/25Owner reach — 5,037 followers of frenck
25/25Track record — 157 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers5,037
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginfrenck
public_repos157
account_age_days6,091
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 12 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespvo
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

82Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

100Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 10 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.pylint]), ruff.toml
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 26 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

55Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://github.com/frenck/python-pvoutput
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://github.com/frenck/python-pvoutput
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

76Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
3/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 26 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/2 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — 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
4.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
6/7.5Signed-Releases — 3 out of the last 3 releases have a total of 3 signed artifacts.
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
6.8/7.5Vulnerabilities — 1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories17
affected_packages3
assessed_packages81
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 2, low 1
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 81 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

58Moderate · 4% of overall
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.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.pylint]), ruff.toml
11/11Static type checking — src/pvo/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — devcontainer, lockfile
4/10Demonstrated agent practice — 2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 98 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
9/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json, poetry.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configssrc/pvo/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.02
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.98
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (src/pvo/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/9 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes11,554
source_files_sampled9
oversized_source_files0
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 — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
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

3GitHub stars
2contributors
255commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
12releases
1bus factor
1open issues
npm, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:pvo@4.0.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

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 · 2026-10-09 09:03 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
4Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests26 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/2 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate 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
9Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
8Signed-Releases3 out of the last 3 releases have a total of 3 signed artifacts.
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIaiohttp(>=3.0.0)pyproject.toml
PyPImashumaro(>=3.10)pyproject.toml
PyPIyarl(>=1.6.0)pyproject.toml
All dependencies 81

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 78 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaiohttp3.14.4direct
PyPImashumaro3.23direct
PyPIyarl1.25.1direct
npmprettier3.9.9indirect
PyPIaiohappyeyeballs2.7.1indirect
PyPIaioresponses0.7.8indirect
PyPIaiosignal1.4.0indirect
PyPIannotated-doc0.0.5indirect
PyPIannotated-types0.8.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.15.1indirect
PyPIastroid4.0.4indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIauthlib1.8.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.7.22indirect
PyPIcffi2.1.1indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.5.2indirect
PyPIclick8.5.0indirect
PyPIcloudpickle3.1.2indirect
PyPIcodespell2.4.2indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcovdefaults2.3.0indirect
PyPIcoverage7.13.5indirect
PyPIcryptography50.0.2indirect
PyPIdefusedxml0.7.1indirect
PyPIdill0.4.1indirect
PyPIdparse0.6.4indirect
PyPIfilelock3.32.7indirect
PyPIfrozenlist1.8.0indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhttpcore1.0.9indirect
PyPIhttpx0.28.1indirect
PyPIidna3.20indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.1indirect
PyPIisort8.0.1indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjoblib1.6.0indirect
PyPIjoserfc1.7.5indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.4indirect
PyPImarshmallow4.3.1indirect
PyPImccabe0.7.0indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImultidict6.9.1indirect
PyPInltk3.10.3indirect
PyPIpackaging26.3indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIpip22.1.2indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.12.4indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpoetry1.1.13indirect
PyPIpre-commit-hooks6.0.0indirect
PyPIprek0.3.9indirect
PyPIpropcache0.5.4indirect
PyPIpycparser3.1indirect
PyPIpydantic2.14.0indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.50.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.21.0indirect
PyPIpylint4.0.5indirect
PyPIpytest9.0.3indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio1.3.0indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIregex2026.9.29indirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2indirect
PyPIrich15.0.0indirect
PyPIruamel-yaml0.19.1indirect
PyPIruff0.16.10indirect
PyPIsafety3.7.0indirect
PyPIsafety-schemas0.0.16indirect
PyPIshellingham1.5.4indirect
PyPIsyrupy5.1.0indirect
PyPItenacity9.2.1indirect
PyPItomlkit0.15.1indirect
PyPItqdm4.70.1indirect
PyPIty0.0.31indirect
PyPItyper0.27.3indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.4indirect
PyPIurllib32.8.0indirect
PyPIyamllint1.38.0indirect
PyPIzizmor1.24.1indirect
Dependency advisories 3

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 81 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 3 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
nltk3.10.3indirecthigh1—
pip22.1.2indirecthigh1426.2.0
poetry1.1.13indirectlow22.3.4

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 statistics — PyPI.