Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-17 16:49 UTC

google / draco

Draco is a library for compressing and decompressing 3D geometric meshes and point clouds. It is intended to improve the storage and transmission of 3D graphics.

C++Apache-2.0★ 7,484 stars⑂ 1,078 forkssince Dec 2016View on GitHub ↗

google/draco holds a health index of 88 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (92/100) and lowest on Vitality (51/100). It was last updated 29 days ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

88
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.

88
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 74 is calibrated to 88 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

GoogleOrganization · verified domain
78,702 followers2,905 public repossince Jan 2012

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?

51Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 29 days ago
8.3/36Commit cadence — 12/52 weeks with commits
11.5/18Commit volume — 18 commits in the last year
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 8 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
commits_last_year18
human_commit_share0.77
days_since_last_push29
active_weeks_last_year12
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 26 releases published
0/36Release recency — latest release 973 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~126.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count26
latest_release_tag1.5.7
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release973
mean_days_between_releases126.1
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?

92Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
60/60Stars — 7,484 stars
25/25Forks — 1,078 forks
13/15Watchers — 217 watchers
Inputs used
forks1,078
stars7,484
watchers217
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges1
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

82Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor — 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
17/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 25% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 63 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 15 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled63
top_contributor_share0.246
How it's scored
34.4/42Issue resolution — 82% of issues closed
24.9/30PR acceptance — 318/383 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 0/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
12/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 11/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
merged_prs318
open_issues137
closed_issues624
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio0.82
closed_unmerged_prs65
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d2
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 78,702 followers of google
25/25Track record — 2,905 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers78,702
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_logingoogle
public_repos2,905
account_age_days5,356

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 24 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://google.github.io/draco/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspoint-cloud, 3d-graphics, compression, mesh
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://google.github.io/draco/
docs_sitehttps://google.github.io/draco/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

71Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0.8/7.5Binary-Artifacts — binaries present in source code
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 24 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6/7.5Code-Review — Found 11/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 15 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
5/5Fuzzing — project is fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
4.5/7.5Maintained — 8 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6
0/5Packaging — no data
1.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
3/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 6
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
3.8/7.5Vulnerabilities — 5 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate6.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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
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
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages98
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
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 98 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.

63Moderate · 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 — 59 of 77 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.766
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — C++ (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 23 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock, package-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.23
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — C++ (statically typed)
53.8/55Manageable file sizes — 11/498 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC++
largest_source_bytes903,348
source_files_sampled498
oversized_source_files11
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 — example
Inputs used
example_dirsexample
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

7,484GitHub stars
63contributors
18commits, last 12 months
29days since last push
26releases
3bus factor
137open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 1,078 ⇿
0Stars
1,078Forks
26Releases

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.

Only the most recent history is shown — this repository exceeds the collection window, so the earliest history is not captured.

02004006008001,0001,2001,078732017-012021-112026-09
Major 1Minor 6Patch 19

Each point covers 9 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.4 / 10
6.4aggregate

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 · 2026-09-17 16:48 UTC

1Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
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
9CI-Tests24 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
8Code-ReviewFound 11/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
10Contributorsproject has 15 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
6Maintained8 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
3Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
6SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 6
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
5Vulnerabilities5 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 98

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 98 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsactivesupport7.2.3.1indirect
RubyGemsaddressable2.9.0indirect
RubyGemsbase640.3.0indirect
RubyGemsbenchmark0.5.0indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal4.0.1indirect
RubyGemscoffee-script2.4.1indirect
RubyGemscoffee-script-source1.12.2indirect
RubyGemscolorator1.1.0indirect
RubyGemscommonmarker0.23.11indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.7indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool3.0.2indirect
RubyGemscsv3.3.5indirect
RubyGemsdnsruby1.73.1indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.3indirect
RubyGemsem-websocket0.5.3indirect
RubyGemsethon0.16.0indirect
RubyGemseventmachine1.2.7indirect
RubyGemsexecjs2.10.0indirect
RubyGemsfaraday2.14.3indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-net_http3.4.4indirect
RubyGemsffi1.17.2indirect
RubyGemsforwardable-extended2.6.0indirect
RubyGemsgemoji4.1.0indirect
RubyGemsgithub-pages232indirect
RubyGemsgithub-pages-health-check1.18.2indirect
RubyGemshtml-pipeline2.14.3indirect
RubyGemshttp_parser.rb0.8.0indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.14.8indirect
RubyGemsjekyll3.10.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-avatar0.8.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-coffeescript1.2.2indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-commonmark1.4.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-commonmark-ghpages0.5.1indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-default-layout0.1.5indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-feed0.17.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-gist1.5.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-github-metadata2.16.1indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-include-cache0.2.1indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-mentions1.6.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-optional-front-matter0.3.2indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-paginate1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-readme-index0.3.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-redirect-from0.16.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-relative-links0.6.1indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-remote-theme0.4.3indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-sass-converter1.5.2indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-seo-tag2.8.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-sitemap1.4.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-swiss1.0.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-theme-architect0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-theme-cayman0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-theme-dinky0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-theme-hacker0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-theme-leap-day0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-theme-merlot0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-theme-midnight0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-theme-minimal0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-theme-modernist0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-theme-primer0.6.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-theme-slate0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-theme-tactile0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-theme-time-machine0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-titles-from-headings0.5.3indirect
RubyGemsjekyll-watch2.2.1indirect
RubyGemsjemoji0.13.0indirect
RubyGemsjson2.21.2indirect
RubyGemskramdown2.4.0indirect
RubyGemskramdown-parser-gfm1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsliquid4.0.4indirect
RubyGemslisten3.9.0indirect
RubyGemslogger1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsmercenary0.3.6indirect
RubyGemsmini_portile22.8.9indirect
RubyGemsminima2.5.1indirect
RubyGemsminitest5.27.0indirect
RubyGemsnet-http0.9.1indirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.19.4indirect
RubyGemsoctokit4.25.1indirect
RubyGemspathutil0.16.2indirect
RubyGemspublic_suffix5.1.1indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrb-fsevent0.11.2indirect
RubyGemsrb-inotify0.11.1indirect
RubyGemsrexml3.4.2indirect
RubyGemsrouge3.30.0indirect
RubyGemsrubyzip2.4.1indirect
RubyGemssafe_yaml1.0.5indirect
RubyGemssass3.7.4indirect
RubyGemssass-listen4.0.0indirect
RubyGemssawyer0.9.2indirect
RubyGemssecurerandom0.4.1indirect
RubyGemssimpleidn0.2.3indirect
RubyGemsterminal-table1.8.0indirect
RubyGemstyphoeus1.4.1indirect
RubyGemstzinfo2.0.6indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width1.8.0indirect
RubyGemsuri1.1.1indirect
RubyGemswebrick1.9.1indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 98 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

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.