Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-10 16:00 UTC

glotaran / pyglotaran

A Python library for Global and Target Analysis of time-resolved spectroscopy data

PythonLGPL-3.0★ 61 stars⑂ 19 forkssince May 2016View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

glotaran/pyglotaran holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (87/100) and lowest on Security (50/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

80
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.

80
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

GloTarAnOrganization
20 followers31 public repossince Dec 2014

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIpyglotaran0.7.52,095180 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

63Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
2.8/36Commit cadence — 4/52 weeks with commits
8.1/18Commit volume — 7 commits in the last year
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
commits_last_year7
human_commit_share0.38
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year4
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 18 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~197.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count18
latest_release_tagv0.7.5
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases197.1
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?

62Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/60Stars — 61 stars
10.5/25Forks — 19 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks19
stars61
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 (LGPL-3.0)
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_badges7
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesbadge.fury.io, codecov.io, github.com, readthedocs.org, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
44.3/80Monthly downloads — 2,095 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagespyglotaran
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads2,095
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?

75Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 43% of commits
12.2/13.5Contributor breadth — 9 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled9
top_contributor_share0.426
How it's scored
41.7/42Issue resolution — 99% of issues closed
17.7/30PR acceptance — 718/1,216 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs718
open_issues3
closed_issues379
prs_merged_7d3
prs_decided_7d5
prs_merged_30d5
prs_decided_30d7
issue_closed_ratio0.992
closed_unmerged_prs498
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
0/20Verified domain
9.5/25Owner reach — 20 followers of glotaran
23/25Track record — 31 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers20
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginglotaran
public_repos31
account_age_days4,330

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 — 18 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespyglotaran
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

87Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 7 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.black], [tool.isort]), tox.ini
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
4/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 8 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://pyglotaran.readthedocs.io
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsglotaran, modelling, data-analysis, pyglotaran, target-analysis, python-library
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://pyglotaran.readthedocs.io
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

50Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
0.5/2.5CI-Tests — 8 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — 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
1.5/7.5Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
1/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
3.5/5SAST — SAST tool detected but not run on all commits
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 — 45 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
19.6/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: asteval 1.0.8 (moderate 5.5)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
40/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory has been public longer than 90 days
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories3
affected_packages1
assessed_packages20
unassessed_packages31
affected_by_severitymoderate 1
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 20 resolved dependencies against OSV. 31 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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.

64Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 38 of 38 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — docs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.black], [tool.isort]), tox.ini
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Nix
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 49 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_nixyes
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesdocs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.49
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/216 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes30,986
source_files_sampled216
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, notebooks
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples, notebooks
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

61GitHub stars
9contributors
7commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
18releases
2bus factor
3open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:pyglotaran@0.7.5; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 19 ⇿
0Stars
19Forks
17Releases

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.

0481216201922018-062022-072026-07
Major 0Minor 6Patch 10

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.3 / 10
4.3aggregate

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 · 2026-10-10 16:00 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
2CI-Tests8 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
0Dangerous-Workflowdangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
2Maintained2 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 2
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
2Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
7SASTSAST tool detected but not run on all commits
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities45 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 15
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIasteval!=0.9.28,>=0.9.22setup.cfg
PyPIattrs>=22.1.0setup.cfg
PyPIclick>=8.1.3setup.cfg
PyPInetCDF4>=1.5.7setup.cfg
PyPInumba>=0.55.0setup.cfg
PyPInumpy>=1.21.2,<2.4setup.cfg
PyPIodfpy>=1.4.1setup.cfg
PyPIopenpyxl>=3.0.10setup.cfg
PyPIpandas>=1.3.4setup.cfg
PyPIpydantic>=2.7.2setup.cfg
PyPIruamel.yaml>=0.17.17setup.cfg
PyPIscipy>=1.7.2setup.cfg
PyPIsdtfile>=2020.8.3setup.cfg
PyPItabulate>=0.8.9setup.cfg
PyPIxarray>=2022.3.0setup.cfg
All dependencies 51

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 20 direct and 31 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIasteval1.0.8direct
PyPIattrs25.4.0direct
PyPIclick8.3.1direct
PyPInetcdf41.7.3direct
PyPInumba0.63.1direct
PyPInumpy2.2.6direct
PyPInumpy2.3.5direct
PyPIodfpy1.4.1direct
PyPIopenpyxl3.1.5direct
PyPIpandas2.3.3direct
PyPIpandas3.0.1direct
PyPIpydantic2.12.5direct
PyPIruamel-yaml0.18.17direct
PyPIscipy1.15.3direct
PyPIscipy1.16.3direct
PyPIsdtfile2024.12.6direct
PyPIsdtfile2025.12.12direct
PyPItabulate0.9.0direct
PyPIxarray2024.11.0direct
PyPIxarray2025.12.0direct
PyPIcoverage—indirect
PyPIflake8—indirect
PyPIipython—indirect
PyPIjinja2—indirect
PyPIjupyterlab—indirect
PyPImatplotlib—indirect
PyPImyst-parser—indirect
PyPInbsphinx—indirect
PyPInbval—indirect
PyPInumpydoc—indirect
PyPIpillow—indirect
PyPIpip—indirect
PyPIpluggy—indirect
PyPIpyglotaran-extras—indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest-allclose—indirect
PyPIpytest-benchmark—indirect
PyPIpytest-cov—indirect
PyPIpytest-env—indirect
PyPIpytest-runner—indirect
PyPIsetuptools—indirect
PyPIsphinx—indirect
PyPIsphinx-click—indirect
PyPIsphinx-copybutton—indirect
PyPIsphinx-last-updated-by-git—indirect
PyPIsphinx-rtd-theme—indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jquery—indirect
PyPItox—indirect
PyPItox-direct—indirect
PyPItypes-dataclasses—indirect
PyPIwheel—indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 20 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct. 31 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
asteval1.0.8directmoderate31.0.9

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.