Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-20 15:37 UTC

fslaborg / flips

Fsharp LInear Programming System

F#MIT★ 271 stars⑂ 30 forkssince Oct 2018View on GitHub ↗

fslaborg/flips holds a health index of 62 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (70/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (41/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

62
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

62
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 58 is calibrated to 62 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

FsLabOrganization
101 followers25 public repossince Sep 2014

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?

50Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
4.2/36Commit cadence6/52 weeks with commits
13.4/18Commit volume30 commits in the last year
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained3 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
commits_last_year30
human_commit_share0.99
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year6
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases1 releases published
0/36Release recencylatest release 2,088 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencecadence unknown (single release)
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count1
latest_release_tagv2.4.4
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release2,088
mean_days_between_releases

Community & Adoption

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

54Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
39.4/60Stars271 stars
12.2/25Forks30 forks
6.8/15Watchers18 watchers
Inputs used
forks30
stars271
watchers18
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges1
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

62Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
8.2/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 64% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth18 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled18
top_contributor_share0.636
How it's scored
38.9/42Issue resolution92% of issues closed
27.4/30PR acceptance128/140 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 4/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs128
open_issues6
closed_issues74
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.925
closed_unmerged_prs12
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 backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
14.4/25Owner reach101 followers of fslaborg
22.3/25Track record25 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers101
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginfslaborg
public_repos25
account_age_days4,388

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

70Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows4 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests8 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://fslab.org/flips/#/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsoptimization, optimization-models, mip, gurobi, optano-library
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://fslab.org/flips/#/
docs_sitehttps://fslab.org/flips/#/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

58Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests8 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 4/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
5/5Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
2.2/7.5Maintained3 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities20 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate4.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories21
affected_packages8
assessed_packages137
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitycritical 1, high 7
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 137 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.

41Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
26.9/40Legible commit history50 of 99 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.505
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingF# (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentdevcontainer, Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance1 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.01
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeF# (statically typed)
0/55Manageable file sizesno source files detected
Inputs used
primary_languageF#
largest_source_bytes
source_files_sampled0
oversized_source_files0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Manageable file sizes. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

271GitHub stars
18contributors
30commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
1releases
1bus factor
6open 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 ★ / 30 ⇿
0Stars
30Forks
1Releases

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.

0510152025303022020-052022-052024-04
Major 0Minor 0Patch 1

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.8 / 10
4.8aggregate

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 · 2026-09-20 15:36 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal 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
10CI-Tests8 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 4/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
10Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
3Maintained3 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 3
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities20 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 137

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 137 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@socket.io/component-emitter3.1.2indirect
npm@types/cors2.8.19indirect
npm@types/node24.0.3indirect
npmaccepts1.3.8indirect
npmansi-regex5.0.1indirect
npmansi-styles4.3.0indirect
npmanymatch3.1.3indirect
npmasync2.6.4indirect
npmasync-each-series0.1.1indirect
npmbalanced-match1.0.2indirect
npmbase64id2.0.0indirect
npmbatch0.6.1indirect
npmbinary-extensions2.3.0indirect
npmbrace-expansion1.1.12indirect
npmbraces3.0.3indirect
npmbrowser-sync3.0.4indirect
npmbrowser-sync-client3.0.4indirect
npmbrowser-sync-ui3.0.4indirect
npmbs-recipes1.3.4indirect
npmbytes3.1.2indirect
npmchalk4.1.2indirect
npmchokidar3.6.0indirect
npmcliui8.0.1indirect
npmcolor-convert2.0.1indirect
npmcolor-name1.1.4indirect
npmcommander2.20.3indirect
npmconcat-map0.0.1indirect
npmconnect3.6.6indirect
npmconnect-history-api-fallback1.6.0indirect
npmcookie0.7.2indirect
npmcors2.8.5indirect
npmdebug2.6.9indirect
npmdebug4.3.7indirect
npmdepd1.1.2indirect
npmdepd2.0.0indirect
npmdestroy1.2.0indirect
npmdev-ip1.0.1indirect
npmeasy-extender2.3.4indirect
npmeazy-logger4.1.0indirect
npmee-first1.1.1indirect
npmemoji-regex8.0.0indirect
npmencodeurl1.0.2indirect
npmencodeurl2.0.0indirect
npmengine.io6.6.4indirect
npmengine.io-client6.6.3indirect
npmengine.io-parser5.2.3indirect
npmescalade3.2.0indirect
npmescape-html1.0.3indirect
npmetag1.8.1indirect
npmeventemitter34.0.7indirect
npmfill-range7.1.1indirect
npmfinalhandler1.1.0indirect
npmfollow-redirects1.16.0indirect
npmfresh0.5.2indirect
npmfs-extra3.0.1indirect
npmfsevents2.3.3indirect
npmget-caller-file2.0.5indirect
npmglob-parent5.1.2indirect
npmgraceful-fs4.2.11indirect
npmhas-flag4.0.0indirect
npmhttp-errors1.6.3indirect
npmhttp-errors2.0.0indirect
npmhttp-proxy1.18.1indirect
npmiconv-lite0.4.24indirect
npmimmutable3.8.2indirect
npminherits2.0.3indirect
npminherits2.0.4indirect
npmis-binary-path2.1.0indirect
npmis-extglob2.1.1indirect
npmis-fullwidth-code-point3.0.0indirect
npmis-glob4.0.3indirect
npmis-number7.0.0indirect
npmis-number-like1.0.8indirect
npmis-wsl1.1.0indirect
npmjsonfile3.0.1indirect
npmlimiter1.1.5indirect
npmlodash4.17.21indirect
npmlodash.isfinite3.3.2indirect
npmmicromatch4.0.8indirect
npmmime1.6.0indirect
npmmime-db1.52.0indirect
npmmime-types2.1.35indirect
npmminimatch3.1.2indirect
npmmitt1.2.0indirect
npmms2.0.0indirect
npmms2.1.3indirect
npmnegotiator0.6.3indirect
npmnormalize-path3.0.0indirect
npmobject-assign4.1.1indirect
npmon-finished2.3.0indirect
npmon-finished2.4.1indirect
npmopn5.3.0indirect
npmparseurl1.3.3indirect
npmpicomatch2.3.1indirect
npmportscanner2.2.0indirect
npmrange-parser1.2.1indirect
npmraw-body2.5.2indirect
npmreaddirp3.6.0indirect
npmrequire-directory2.1.1indirect
npmrequires-port1.0.0indirect
npmresp-modifier6.0.2indirect
npmrx4.1.0indirect
npmsafer-buffer2.1.2indirect
npmsend0.19.0indirect
npmsend0.19.1indirect
npmserve-index1.9.1indirect
npmserve-static1.16.2indirect
npmserver-destroy1.0.1indirect
npmsetprototypeof1.1.0indirect
npmsetprototypeof1.2.0indirect
npmsocket.io4.8.1indirect
npmsocket.io-adapter2.5.5indirect
npmsocket.io-client4.8.1indirect
npmsocket.io-parser4.2.4indirect
npmstatuses1.3.1indirect
npmstatuses1.5.0indirect
npmstatuses2.0.1indirect
npmstream-throttle0.1.3indirect
npmstring-width4.2.3indirect
npmstrip-ansi6.0.1indirect
npmsupports-color7.2.0indirect
npmto-regex-range5.0.1indirect
npmtoidentifier1.0.1indirect
npmua-parser-js1.0.40indirect
npmundici-types7.8.0indirect
npmuniversalify0.1.2indirect
npmunpipe1.0.0indirect
npmutils-merge1.0.1indirect
npmvary1.1.2indirect
npmwrap-ansi7.0.0indirect
npmws8.17.1indirect
npmxmlhttprequest-ssl2.1.2indirect
npmy18n5.0.8indirect
npmyargs17.7.2indirect
npmyargs-parser21.1.1indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.SourceLink.AzureRepos.Git1.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.SourceLink.GitHub1.0.0indirect
Dependency advisories 8

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 137 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 8 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
immutable3.8.2indirectcritical35.1.8
brace-expansion1.1.12indirecthigh45.0.9
engine.io6.6.4indirecthigh26.6.7
lodash4.17.21indirecthigh34.18.0
minimatch3.1.2indirecthigh310.2.3
picomatch2.3.1indirecthigh24.0.4
socket.io-parser4.2.4indirecthigh24.2.7
ws8.17.1indirecthigh28.21.0

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.

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.