Public record
Software health reportschema 0.12.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-18 12:32 UTC

h2non / jsonpath-ng

Finally, a JSONPath implementation for Python that aims to be standard compliant. That's all. Enjoy!

PythonApache-2.0★ 735 stars⑂ 119 forkssince Mar 2017forkView on GitHub ↗

h2non/jsonpath-ng holds a health index of 63 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (75/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (48/100). It was last updated 16 days ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

63
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.

63
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 59 is calibrated to 63 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

TomPersonal account
931 followers258 public repossince Mar 2009Dissident

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIjsonpath-ng1.8.0-11140 days ago

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 recencylast push 16 days ago
6.9/36Commit cadence10/52 weeks with commits
10.6/18Commit volume14 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintainedno data
Inputs used
commits_last_year14
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push16
active_weeks_last_year10
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases3 releases published
7.2/36Release recencylatest release 644 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~196.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count3
latest_release_tagv1.7.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release644
mean_days_between_releases196.9

Community & Adoption

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

48Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
46.5/60Stars735 stars
17.3/25Forks119 forks
5.6/15Watchers11 watchers
Inputs used
forks119
stars735
watchers11
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
0/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeno
has_licenseno
readme_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

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
36/54Bus factor3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15.8/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 30% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth44 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsno data
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled44
top_contributor_share0.299
How it's scored
22.7/42Issue resolution54% of issues closed
22.3/30PR acceptance61/82 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewno data
Inputs used
merged_prs61
open_issues62
closed_issues73
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.541
closed_unmerged_prs21
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
21.3/25Owner reach931 followers of h2non
25/25Track record258 public repos, account ~17 yr old
Inputs used
followers931
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginh2non
public_repos258
account_age_days6,334
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 140 days ago
20/20Version history11 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesjsonpath-ng
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish140

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

61Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configtox.ini
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

20At Risk
How it's scored
0/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
0/10Repository description
10/10Topics8 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsjsonpath, json, xpath, python, path, documents, query, filter
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeno
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionno

Security

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

60Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
25/25Dependabot config
0/25Dependency lockfilespublished library — lockfiles are an application concern, not expected
20/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfiles
manifestspyproject.toml, requirements-dev.txt, requirements.txt, setup.py
has_codeql_workflowyes
has_security_policyno
has_dependabot_configyes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dependency lockfiles. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

48Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configtox.ini
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentdevcontainer
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
5/8Automated maintenancedependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
53.1/55Manageable file sizes1/29 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes135,305
source_files_sampled29
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

735GitHub stars
44contributors
14commits, last 12 months
16days since last push
3releases
3bus factor
62open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Community profile unavailable
  • OpenSSF Scorecard timed out after 240s; skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

All dependencies 5

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 5 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIflake8indirect
PyPIhypothesisindirect
PyPIpytestindirect
PyPIsetuptoolsindirect
PyPItoxindirect
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 v0.12.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsPyPI.