Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-24 18:07 UTC

fulup-bzh / GeoGate

GeoGate is an opensource tracking GPS/AIS framework to implement GTS applications.

JavaScriptApache-2.0★ 81 stars⑂ 41 forkssince Nov 2014View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

fulup-bzh/GeoGate holds a health index of 53 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (73/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (34/100). It was last updated 40 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

53
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.

53
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 52 is calibrated to 53 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Fulup Ar FollPersonal account
21 followers25 public repossince Jun 2014IOT.BZH

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

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

40Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 40 days ago
3.5/36Commit cadence — 5/52 weeks with commits
10/18Commit volume — 12 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 10 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year12
human_commit_share0.99
days_since_last_push40
active_weeks_last_year5
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 5 releases published
0/36Release recency — latest release 1,822 days ago
5.4/27Release cadence — a release every ~636.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count5
latest_release_tag0.3.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1,822
mean_days_between_releases636.2
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?

55Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
30.9/60Stars — 81 stars
13.4/25Forks — 41 forks
6.7/15Watchers — 17 watchers
Inputs used
forks41
stars81
watchers17
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
55.2/80Monthly downloads — 13,918 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesggsmsc, ggsmsg, ggserver, ggencoder, ggsimulator
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads13,918
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?

73Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
13.4/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 40% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 15 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled15
top_contributor_share0.404
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
29.3/30PR acceptance — 41/42 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 7/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs41
open_issues0
closed_issues27
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs1
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
9.7/25Owner reach — 21 followers of fulup-bzh
22.3/25Track record — 25 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers21
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginfulup-bzh
public_repos25
account_age_days4,510
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 5 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 40 days ago
20/20Version history — 32 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesggsmsc, ggsmsg, ggserver, ggencoder, ggsimulator
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish40

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

34At Risk · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
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-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3/7.5Code-Review — Found 7/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
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 — 10 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate5.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
10/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: underscore 1.1.7 (high 7.5)
33.7/40No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 235 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories1
affected_packages1
assessed_packages29
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 1
direct_affected_packages0
Matched the npm:ggsmsc@0.1.8 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 29 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.

46Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
27.5/40Legible commit history — 51 of 99 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.515
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
2/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 1 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.01
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — JavaScript without a type-check config
54.3/55Manageable file sizes — 1/82 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes65,421
source_files_sampled82
oversized_source_files1
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 — sample
Inputs used
example_dirssample
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

81GitHub stars
15contributors
12commits, last 12 months
40days since last push
5releases
2bus factor
0open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch npm package 'ggAisWeb' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 41 ⇿
0Stars
41Forks
4Releases

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.

010203040504142015-042020-122026-09
Major 0Minor 2Patch 2

Each point covers 11 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.3 / 10
5.3aggregate

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 · 2026-10-24 18:07 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4Code-ReviewFound 7/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained10 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 21
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmasync*server/package.json
npmtraceback*server/package.json
npmjison*server/package.json
npmmysql*server/package.json
npmmongodb~3.6server/package.json
npmsgeo*server/package.json
npmxml2js*server/package.json
npmws*server/package.json
npmggencoder*server/package.json
npmasync*simulator/package.json
npmjison*simulator/package.json
npmsgeo*simulator/package.json
npmxml2js*simulator/package.json
npmggencoder*simulator/package.json
npmtraceback*smsc/package.json
npmjison*smsc/package.json
npmmysql*smsc/package.json
npmggsmsc*smsg/package.json
npmtraceback*smsg/package.json
npmasync*smsg/package.json
npmmysql*smsg/package.json
All dependencies 42

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 10 direct and 32 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmasync*direct
npmggencoder*direct
npmggsmsc*direct
npmjison*direct
npmmongodb~3.6direct
npmmysql*direct
npmsgeo*direct
npmtraceback*direct
npmws*direct
npmxml2js*direct
npmdel*indirect
npmevent-stream*indirect
npmfront-router*indirect
npmgulp*indirect
npmgulp-angular-filesort*indirect
npmgulp-clean-css*indirect
npmgulp-concat*indirect
npmgulp-debug*indirect
npmgulp-htmlhint*indirect
npmgulp-htmlmin*indirect
npmgulp-imagemin*indirect
npmgulp-inject*indirect
npmgulp-jshint*indirect
npmgulp-livereload*indirect
npmgulp-load-plugins*indirect
npmgulp-ng-annotate*indirect
npmgulp-ng-html2js*indirect
npmgulp-nodemon*indirect
npmgulp-order*indirect
npmgulp-print*indirect
npmgulp-rename*indirect
npmgulp-replace*indirect
npmgulp-sass*indirect
npmgulp-sourcemaps*indirect
npmgulp-sym*indirect
npmgulp-task-listing*indirect
npmgulp-uglify*indirect
npmimagemin-pngquant*indirect
npmjshint*indirect
npmjshint-stylish*indirect
npmmain-bower-files*indirect
npmq*indirect
Dependency advisories 1

Installing npm:ggsmsc@0.1.8 pulls in 29 packages, direct and transitive: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
underscore1.1.7indirecthigh11.13.8

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 — npm.