Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-13 21:48 UTC

gtk-rs / gtk3-rs

Rust bindings for GTK 3

RustMIT★ 500 stars⑂ 86 forkssince Oct 2020View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryDesktop applicationhow this is determined

gtk-rs/gtk3-rs holds a health index of 26 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (77/100) and lowest on Vitality (21/100). It was last updated 892 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

26
overall / 100
At Risk

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.

26
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). High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 50% multiplier to weighted overall health and gives it an At Risk ceiling of 34.

Ownership

gtk-rsOrganization
254 followers34 public repossince Apr 2015

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.ioatk0.18.22,893,28812612 days agoaccessibilityatkgnomegtk-rsapi-bindingsgui
crates.iogdk0.18.22,894,14238612 days agogdkgnomegtkgtk-rsgui
crates.iogtk0.18.22,894,55941612 days agognomegtkgtk-rsguiapi-bindings
crates.iogdkx110.18.22,379,1899612 days agogdkgdkx11gnomegtk-rsgui
crates.iogdkwayland0.18.227210612 days agogdkgdk-waylandgnomegtk-rsgui
crates.iogtk3-macros0.18.22,888,21912612 days agognomegtkgtk-rsgtk3guiapi-bindings

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

21At Risk · 21% of overall
How it's scored
0/36Push recencylast push 892 days ago
0/36Commit cadence0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push892
active_weeks_last_year0
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases12 releases published
0/36Release recencylatest release 1,075 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~64.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count12
latest_release_tag0.18.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1,075
mean_days_between_releases64.4
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?

66Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
43.8/60Stars500 stars
16.1/25Forks86 forks
0/15Watchers1 watchers
Inputs used
forks86
stars500
watchers1
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_servicesgithub.com
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads13,949,669 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesatk, gdk, gtk, gdkx11, gdkwayland, gtk3-macros
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads119,956,639
monthly_downloads13,949,669
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?

77Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12.7/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 43% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth100 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 50 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled100
top_contributor_share0.434
How it's scored
35.3/42Issue resolution84% of issues closed
27.5/30PR acceptance488/533 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
10.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 9/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
merged_prs488
open_issues40
closed_issues212
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.841
closed_unmerged_prs45
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 domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
17.3/25Owner reach254 followers of gtk-rs
23.2/25Track record34 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers254
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_logingtk-rs
public_repos34
account_age_days4,152
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable6 package(s) on crates
14/35Publish recencylatest publish 612 days ago
20/20Version history41 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesatk, gdk, gtk, gdkx11, gdkwayland, gtk3-macros
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish612

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

59Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://gtk-rs.org
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics7 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsgtk-rs, gtk, gdk, gtk3, atk, gdkx11, gtk3-macros
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://gtk-rs.org
docs_sitehttps://gtk-rs.org
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

30At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 9/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 50 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packagingno data
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-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate4.1
high_risk_jurisdiction_cap34
high_risk_jurisdiction_multiplier50
security_posture_after_multiplier20
security_posture_before_jurisdiction41
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized. High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 50% multiplier and gives Security posture an At risk ceiling of 34.
How it's scored
18.8/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories2 affected: glib 0.18.5 (moderate 5.3), atk-sys 0.18.2 (unknown)
19/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories1 affected: proc-macro-error 1.0.4 (unknown)
31.2/40No advisories left outstanding3 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 892 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories4
affected_packages3
assessed_packages49
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitymoderate 1, unknown 2
direct_affected_packages2
Matched the crates:atk@0.18.2 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 49 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.

58Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
20.3/40Legible commit history38 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.38
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapCargo.toml, atk/Cargo.toml, atk/sys/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, atk/Cargo.toml, atk/sys/Cargo.toml, examples/Cargo.toml, gdk/Cargo.toml, gdk/sys/Cargo.toml, gdkwayland/Cargo.toml, gdkwayland/sys/Cargo.toml, gdkx11/Cargo.toml, gdkx11/sys/Cargo.toml, gtk/Cargo.toml, gtk/sys/Cargo.toml, gtk3-macros/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
53.1/55Manageable file sizes19/553 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes1,100,661
source_files_sampled553
oversized_source_files19
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
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

500GitHub stars
100contributors
0commits, last 12 months
892days since last push
12releases
2bus factor
40open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 86 ⇿
0Stars
86Forks
12Releases

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.

0204060801008652020-102023-072026-04
Major 0Minor 3Patch 9

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.1 / 10
4.1aggregate

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 · 2026-08-13 21:47 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
0CI-Tests0 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7Code-ReviewFound 9/12 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
10Contributorsproject has 50 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not 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
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 39
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iolibc0.2atk/Cargo.toml
crates.ioffiatk/Cargo.toml
crates.ioglibatk/Cargo.toml
crates.iolibc0.2gdk/Cargo.toml
crates.ioffigdk/Cargo.toml
crates.iocairo-rsgdk/Cargo.toml
crates.iogdk-pixbufgdk/Cargo.toml
crates.iogiogdk/Cargo.toml
crates.ioglibgdk/Cargo.toml
crates.iopangogdk/Cargo.toml
crates.ioffigdkwayland/Cargo.toml
crates.iogdkgdkwayland/Cargo.toml
crates.ioglibgdkwayland/Cargo.toml
crates.iolibc0.2gdkwayland/Cargo.toml
crates.iowayland-client0.30gdkwayland/Cargo.toml
crates.iowayland-backend0.1gdkwayland/Cargo.toml
crates.iolibc0.2gdkx11/Cargo.toml
crates.iox112.18gdkx11/Cargo.toml
crates.ioffigdkx11/Cargo.toml
crates.ioglibgdkx11/Cargo.toml
crates.iogdkgdkx11/Cargo.toml
crates.iogiogdkx11/Cargo.toml
crates.iolibc0.2gtk/Cargo.toml
crates.iofield-offset0.3gtk/Cargo.toml
crates.iofutures-channel0.3gtk/Cargo.toml
crates.ioatkgtk/Cargo.toml
crates.ioffigtk/Cargo.toml
crates.iogtk3-macrosgtk/Cargo.toml
crates.iocairo-rsgtk/Cargo.toml
crates.iogiogtk/Cargo.toml
crates.ioglibgtk/Cargo.toml
crates.iogdkgtk/Cargo.toml
crates.iogdk-pixbufgtk/Cargo.toml
crates.iopangogtk/Cargo.toml
crates.ioproc-macro-error1.0gtk3-macros/Cargo.toml
crates.ioproc-macro21.0gtk3-macros/Cargo.toml
crates.ioquote1.0gtk3-macros/Cargo.toml
crates.iosyn2.0gtk3-macros/Cargo.toml
crates.ioproc-macro-crate1.0gtk3-macros/Cargo.toml
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

Dependency advisories 3

Installing crates:atk@0.18.2 pulls in 49 packages, direct and transitive: 3 carry known advisories, of which 2 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
glib0.18.5directmoderate20.20.0
atk-sys0.18.2directunknown1
proc-macro-error1.0.4indirectunknown1

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticscrates.io.