Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-17 00:33 UTC

hanachin / meibo

RubyMIT★ 8 stars⑂ 1 forksince Oct 2022View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

hanachin/meibo holds a health index of 57 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (66/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (37/100). It was last updated 42 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

57
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.

57
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 55 is calibrated to 57 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Seiei MiyagiPersonal account
316 followers179 public repossince Dec 2009@codetakt

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
RubyGemsmeibo0.29.1-3342 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

54Moderate · 21% of overall

Development activity

42Weak
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 42 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence — 3/52 weeks with commits
16.8/18Commit volume — 74 commits in the last year
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 7 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
commits_last_year74
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push42
active_weeks_last_year3

Release discipline

72Good
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 33 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recency — latest release 42 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~139.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count33
latest_release_tagv0.29.1
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release42
mean_days_between_releases139.2
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?

43Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

14Critical
How it's scored
13.7/60Stars — 8 stars
0/25Forks — 1 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars8
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

65Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code 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_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

58Moderate
How it's scored
46.5/80Total downloads — 29,896 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesmeibo
dependents—
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads29,896
monthly_downloads—
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?

60Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

22At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.1/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 11 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.996

Issue & PR responsiveness

67Good
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
30/30PR acceptance — 17/17 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs17
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs0
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.

Ownership & stewardship

66Good
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
18/25Owner reach — 316 followers of hanachin
25/25Track record — 179 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers316
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginhanachin
public_repos179
account_age_days6,121
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 42 days ago
20/20Version history — 33 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesmeibo
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish42

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

66Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

84Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 6 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

40Weak
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
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?

56Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

45Weak
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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 6 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 11 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
3.8/7.5Maintained — 7 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
0/5Packaging — no data
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
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
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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_packages50
unassessed_packages3
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 50 resolved dependencies against OSV. 3 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.

37Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

8Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
8.5/40Legible commit history — 16 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.16
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

53Moderate
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Nix, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixyes
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Ruby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/114 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes9,976
source_files_sampled114
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

8GitHub stars
2contributors
74commits, last 12 months
42days since last push
33releases
1bus factor
0open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.5 / 10
4.5aggregate

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 00:33 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests6 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 11 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
5Maintained7 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
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 7
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsrake~> 13.0Gemfile
RubyGemsrspec~> 3.0Gemfile
RubyGemsrubocop~> 1.21Gemfile
RubyGemsrubocop-rake—Gemfile
RubyGemsrubocop-rspec—Gemfile
RubyGemsfactory_bot—Gemfile
RubyGemsdebug—Gemfile
All dependencies 53

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 46 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsdebug1.11.1direct
RubyGemsfactory_bot6.6.0direct
RubyGemsrake13.4.2direct
RubyGemsrspec3.13.2direct
RubyGemsrubocop1.89.0direct
RubyGemsrubocop-rake0.7.1direct
RubyGemsrubocop-rspec3.10.2direct
RubyGemsactivesupport8.1.3.1indirect
RubyGemsast2.4.3indirect
RubyGemsbase640.3.0indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal4.1.2indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.8indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool3.0.2indirect
RubyGemscsv—indirect
RubyGemscsv3.3.6indirect
RubyGemsdiff-lcs1.6.2indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.3indirect
RubyGemserb6.0.7indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.15.2indirect
RubyGemsio-console0.8.2indirect
RubyGemsirb1.18.0indirect
RubyGemsjson2.21.2indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.6indirect
RubyGemslint_roller1.1.0indirect
RubyGemslogger1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsminitest6.0.6indirect
RubyGemsparallel2.1.0indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.12.0indirect
RubyGemspp0.6.4indirect
RubyGemsprettyprint0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsprism1.9.0indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrbs4.1.2indirect
RubyGemsrdoc8.0.0indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.12.0indirect
RubyGemsreline0.6.3indirect
RubyGemsrspec-core3.13.6indirect
RubyGemsrspec-expectations3.13.5indirect
RubyGemsrspec-mocks3.13.8indirect
RubyGemsrspec-support3.13.7indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.50.0indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemsrubyzip—indirect
RubyGemsrubyzip3.4.1indirect
RubyGemssecurerandom0.4.1indirect
RubyGemstsort0.2.0indirect
RubyGemstzinfo2.0.6indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-emoji4.2.0indirect
RubyGemsuri1.1.1indirect
RubyGemszeitwerk—indirect
RubyGemszeitwerk2.8.3indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 50 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 3 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with hanachin/meibo. Read them side by side →

100apache/arrowApache Arrow is the universal columnar format and multi-language toolbox for fast data interchange and in-memory analyticsExceptional99grpc/grpcC++ based gRPC (C++, Python, Ruby, Objective-C, PHP, C#)Exceptional99stripe/stripe-rubyRuby library for the Stripe API. Exceptional99fluent/fluentdFluentd: Unified Logging Layer (project under CNCF)Exceptional99opf/openprojectOpenProject is the leading open source project management software for product, project and portfolio management. A powerful Jira alternative with agile planning, issue tracking, roadmaps, Gantt charts, time tracking, collaboration features, and more. Available on premises or in the cloud. ⭐ Star us on GitHubExceptional99open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rubyOpenTelemetry Ruby API & SDK, and related gemsExceptional

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 — RubyGems.