Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-19 06:04 UTC

hanaboso / go-rabbitmq

GoMIT★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Mar 2020View on GitHub ↗

hanaboso/go-rabbitmq holds a health index of 30 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (50/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (24/100). It was last updated 74 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

30
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.

30
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 36 is calibrated to 30 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

hanabosoOrganization
0 followers32 public repossince Apr 2018

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Gogithub.com/hanaboso/go-rabbitmqv1.3.0-1074 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

44Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 74 days ago
1.4/36Commit cadence — 2/52 weeks with commits
4.3/18Commit volume — 2 commits in the last year
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
commits_last_year2
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push74
active_weeks_last_year2
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 10 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recency — latest release 74 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~143.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count10
latest_release_tagv1.3.0
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release74
mean_days_between_releases143.3
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?

24At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 0 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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_badges0
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?

47Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 47% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 4 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.472
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
0/30PR acceptance — 0/1 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs0
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio—
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): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
0/25Owner reach — 0 followers of hanaboso
23.1/25Track record — 32 public repos, account ~8 yr old
Inputs used
followers0
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginhanaboso
public_repos32
account_age_days3,096

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 74 days ago
20/20Version history — 10 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/hanaboso/go-rabbitmq
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish74

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

30At 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 — no data
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

30At Risk
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionno

Security

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

26At Risk · 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 — no data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0.8/7.5Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 11 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate1.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
7.6/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: github.com/rabbitmq/amqp091-go 1.10.0 (critical 9.8)
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
advisories21
affected_packages1
assessed_packages10
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitycritical 1
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 10 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.

50Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
1.1/40Legible commit history — 1 of 47 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.021
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 47
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/19 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes7,057
source_files_sampled19
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

0GitHub stars
4contributors
2commits, last 12 months
74days since last push
10releases
2bus factor
0open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 1.7 / 10
1.7aggregate

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 · 2026-10-19 06:04 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
1Maintained2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
0Vulnerabilities11 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 4
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/hanaboso/go-logv1.1.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/hanaboso/go-utilsv1.0.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/rabbitmq/amqp091-gov1.10.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testifyv1.10.0go.mod
All dependencies 10

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 6 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/hanaboso/go-log1.1.0direct
Gogithub.com/hanaboso/go-utils1.0.1direct
Gogithub.com/rabbitmq/amqp091-go1.10.0direct
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testify1.10.0direct
Gogithub.com/davecgh/go-spew1.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/pmezard/go-difflib1.0.0indirect
Gogo.uber.org/multierr1.11.0indirect
Gogo.uber.org/zap1.27.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/exp0.0.0-20250606033433-dcc06ee1d476indirect
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v33.0.1indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 10 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
github.com/rabbitmq/amqp091-go1.10.0directcritical211.14.0

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 — Go.