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

fsfe / reuse-tool

This is a mirror of https://codeberg.org/fsfe/reuse-tool

PythonCustom license★ 587 stars⑂ 163 forkssince Apr 2019View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

fsfe/reuse-tool holds a health index of 90 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (96/100) and lowest on Security (54/100). It was last updated 9 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

90
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.

90
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 76 is calibrated to 90 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Free Software Foundation EuropeOrganization · verified domain
97 followers12 public repossince Apr 2017

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIreuse6.2.0672,26536319 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

79Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 9 days ago
22.2/36Commit cadence — 32/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 345 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 12 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year345
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push9
active_weeks_last_year32
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 25 releases published
16.2/36Release recency — latest release 319 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~38.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count25
latest_release_tagv6.2.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release319
mean_days_between_releases38.6
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?

80Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
44.9/60Stars — 587 stars
18.4/25Forks — 163 forks
5.8/15Watchers — 12 watchers
Inputs used
forks163
stars587
watchers12
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5License — license file present, not a recognized license
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseno
readme_badges3
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
77.7/80Monthly downloads — 672,265 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesreuse
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads672,265
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?

70Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 72% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 99 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 38 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled99
top_contributor_share0.722
How it's scored
41.9/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
24.7/30PR acceptance — 515/626 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_prs515
open_issues2
closed_issues648
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.997
closed_unmerged_prs111
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 backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
14.3/25Owner reach — 97 followers of fsfe
20.1/25Track record — 12 public repos, account ~9 yr old
Inputs used
followers97
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginfsfe
public_repos12
account_age_days3,428
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
26/35Publish recency — latest publish 319 days ago
20/20Version history — 36 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesreuse
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish319

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

96Exceptional · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

100Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .pylintrc, pyproject.toml ([tool.black], [tool.isort])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://reuse.software
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 10 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspython, copyright, licensing, linter, reuse, analyzer, fsfe, spdx, free-software, sbom
has_wikino
homepagehttps://reuse.software
docs_sitehttps://reuse.software
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

54Moderate · 16% of overall
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
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 38 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
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 12 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 48 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate4.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Packaging, Signed-Releases. 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_packages9
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:reuse@6.2.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 9 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.

61Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
34.7/40Legible commit history — 65 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.65
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile, docs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .pylintrc, pyproject.toml ([tool.black], [tool.isort])
11/11Static type checking — src/reuse/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespoetry.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile, docs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configssrc/reuse/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (src/reuse/py.typed)
54.1/55Manageable file sizes — 1/60 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes62,952
source_files_sampled60
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

587GitHub stars
99contributors
345commits, last 12 months
9days since last push
25releases
1bus factor
2open 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 ★ / 163 ⇿
0Stars
163Forks
25Releases

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.

0408012016020016142019-082022-122026-04
Major 6Minor 6Patch 12

Each point covers 7 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.2 / 10
4.2aggregate

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 · 2026-09-12 09:12 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
10Contributorsproject has 38 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained12 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
1Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities48 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 10
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIJinja2>=3.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIlicense-expression>=21.6.14pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-debian>=0.1.48pyproject.toml
PyPItomlkit>=0.11.7pyproject.toml
PyPIattrs>=23.2pyproject.toml
PyPIclick>=8.1pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-magic>=0.4.12pyproject.toml
PyPIfile-magic>=0.4.1pyproject.toml
PyPIcharset-normalizer>=2.0.5pyproject.toml
PyPIchardet>=3.0.2pyproject.toml
All dependencies 93

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 10 direct and 83 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIattrs25.4.0direct
PyPIchardet5.2.0direct
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.4direct
PyPIclick8.3.0direct
PyPIfile-magic0.4.1direct
PyPIjinja23.1.6direct
PyPIlicense-expression30.4.4direct
PyPIpython-debian1.0.1direct
PyPIpython-magic0.4.27direct
PyPItomlkit0.13.3direct
PyPIaccessible-pygments0.0.5indirect
PyPIalabaster1.0.0indirect
PyPIastroid4.0.1indirect
PyPIbabel2.17.0indirect
PyPIbeautifulsoup44.14.2indirect
PyPIblack25.9.0indirect
PyPIboolean-py5.0indirect
PyPIbumpver2025.1131indirect
PyPIcertifi2025.10.5indirect
PyPIcfgv3.4.0indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverage7.11.0indirect
PyPIdill0.4.0indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.0indirect
PyPIdocstring-to-markdown0.17indirect
PyPIdocutils0.21.2indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.0indirect
PyPIfilelock3.20.0indirect
PyPIfreezegun1.5.5indirect
PyPIfuro2025.9.25indirect
PyPIgitdb4.0.12indirect
PyPIgitpython3.1.45indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.15indirect
PyPIidna3.11indirect
PyPIimagesize1.4.1indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata8.7.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIisort7.0.0indirect
PyPIjedi0.19.2indirect
PyPIlexid2021.1006indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py3.0.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImccabe0.7.0indirect
PyPImdit-py-plugins0.5.0indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImypy1.18.2indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPImyst-parser4.0.1indirect
PyPInodeenv1.9.1indirect
PyPIpackaging25.0indirect
PyPIparso0.8.5indirect
PyPIpathspec0.12.1indirect
PyPIpbr7.0.1indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.5.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.3.0indirect
PyPIprotokolo3.0.2indirect
PyPIpygments2.19.2indirect
PyPIpylint4.0.2indirect
PyPIpyls-isort0.2.2indirect
PyPIpylsp-mypy0.7.0indirect
PyPIpytest8.4.2indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.0.0indirect
PyPIpytest-lazy-fixtures1.4.0indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-lsp-black2.0.0indirect
PyPIpython-lsp-jsonrpc1.1.2indirect
PyPIpython-lsp-server1.13.1indirect
PyPIpytokens0.2.0indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIrequests2.32.5indirect
PyPIroman-numerals-py3.1.0indirect
PyPIsetuptools80.9.0indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsmmap5.0.2indirect
PyPIsnowballstemmer3.0.1indirect
PyPIsoupsieve2.8indirect
PyPIsphinx8.1.3indirect
PyPIsphinx-basic-ng1.0.0b2indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-apidoc0.6.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-applehelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-devhelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-htmlhelp2.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jsmath1.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-qthelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-serializinghtml2.0.0indirect
PyPItoml0.10.2indirect
PyPItomli2.3.0indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0indirect
PyPIujson5.11.0indirect
PyPIurllib32.5.0indirect
PyPIvirtualenv20.35.3indirect
PyPIzipp3.23.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:reuse@6.2.0 pulls in 9 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 statistics — PyPI.