Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-12 11:42 UTC

hashicorp / setup-packer

Run HashiCorp Packer as part of your GitHub Actions Workflow

HCL · TypeScriptApache-2.0★ 165 stars⑂ 88 forkssince Mar 2020View on GitHub ↗

hashicorp/setup-packer holds a health index of 84 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (83/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (61/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

84
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.

84
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 71 is calibrated to 84 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

HashiCorpOrganization · verified domain
10,858 followers943 public repossince May 2011

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?

71Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 4 days ago
9/36Commit cadence — 13/52 weeks with commits
11.7/18Commit volume — 19 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_year19
human_commit_share0.577
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year13
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 8 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 81 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~325.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count8
latest_release_tagv3.4.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release81
mean_days_between_releases325.8
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?

64Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
35.9/60Stars — 165 stars
16.2/25Forks — 88 forks
4.7/15Watchers — 8 watchers
Inputs used
forks88
stars165
watchers8
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges1
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

83Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor — 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
16.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 27% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 20 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled20
top_contributor_share0.267
How it's scored
34.2/42Issue resolution — 81% of issues closed
15.5/30PR acceptance — 71/137 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs71
open_issues8
closed_issues35
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.814
closed_unmerged_prs66
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 backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 10,858 followers of hashicorp
25/25Track record — 943 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers10,858
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginhashicorp
public_repos943
account_age_days5,613

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

61Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
10/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 16 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
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 site — https://github.com/marketplace/actions/setup-hashicorp-packer
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsgithub-actions, hashicorp, packer
has_wikino
homepagehttps://github.com/marketplace/actions/setup-hashicorp-packer
docs_sitehttps://github.com/marketplace/actions/setup-hashicorp-packer
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

77Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
4.5/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
1.2/2.5CI-Tests — 16 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not 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
3/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
2.5/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 5
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file 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_aggregate7.1
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_packages56
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 56 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.

62Moderate · 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 — 37 of 45 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.822
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 — tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 78
8/8Automated maintenance — 23 of the last 78 commits are automated dependency updates
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.295
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — HCL with type-check config (tsconfig.json)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/1 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageHCL
largest_source_bytes547
source_files_sampled1
oversized_source_files0
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 — examples
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

165GitHub stars
20contributors
19commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
8releases
3bus factor
8open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Star history carried forward from 2026-07-01: GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository admins, so it can no longer be collected. The repository has 165 stars today.
  • Could not fetch npm package 'setup-packer' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 164 ★ / 88 ⇿
164Stars
88Forks
8Releases

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.

Star history is shown as collected on 2026-07-01. GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository administrators in July 2026, so this series can no longer be extended; the current star total above remains live.

040801201602001648282020-032023-052026-06
Major 2Minor 5Patch 1

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.1 / 10
7.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-12 11:41 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
6Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
5CI-Tests16 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not 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
6Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 5
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@actions/core^2.0.3package.json
npm@actions/http-client^4.0.1package.json
npm@hashicorp/github-actions-coregithub:hashicorp/github-actions-core#v1.3.0package.json
All dependencies 56

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 52 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@actions/core2.0.3direct
npm@actions/http-client3.0.2direct
npm@actions/http-client4.0.1direct
npm@hashicorp/github-actions-core1.0.0direct
npm@actions/exec2.0.0indirect
npm@actions/io1.1.3indirect
npm@actions/io2.0.0indirect
npm@actions/tool-cache3.0.1indirect
npm@hashicorp/js-releases1.7.7indirect
npm@types/node24.12.0indirect
npm@types/semver7.8.0indirect
npmagent-base6.0.2indirect
npmagent-base7.1.4indirect
npmasn1.js5.4.1indirect
npmasynckit0.4.0indirect
npmaxios1.18.0indirect
npmbn.js4.12.3indirect
npmbuffer-crc320.2.13indirect
npmcall-bind-apply-helpers1.0.2indirect
npmcombined-stream1.0.8indirect
npmdebug4.4.3indirect
npmdelayed-stream1.0.0indirect
npmdunder-proto1.0.1indirect
npmes-define-property1.0.1indirect
npmes-errors1.3.0indirect
npmes-object-atoms1.1.2indirect
npmes-set-tostringtag2.1.0indirect
npmfd-slicer1.1.0indirect
npmfollow-redirects1.16.0indirect
npmform-data4.0.6indirect
npmfunction-bind1.1.2indirect
npmget-intrinsic1.3.0indirect
npmget-proto1.0.1indirect
npmgopd1.2.0indirect
npmhas-symbols1.1.0indirect
npmhas-tostringtag1.0.2indirect
npmhasown2.0.4indirect
npmhttps-proxy-agent5.0.1indirect
npmhttps-proxy-agent7.0.6indirect
npminherits2.0.4indirect
npmmath-intrinsics1.1.0indirect
npmmime-db1.52.0indirect
npmmime-types2.1.35indirect
npmminimalistic-assert1.0.1indirect
npmms2.1.3indirect
npmopenpgp5.11.3indirect
npmpend1.2.0indirect
npmproxy-from-env2.1.0indirect
npmsafer-buffer2.1.2indirect
npmsemver6.3.1indirect
npmsemver7.8.4indirect
npmtunnel0.0.6indirect
npmtypescript5.9.3indirect
npmundici6.28.0indirect
npmundici-types7.16.0indirect
npmyauzl2.10.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 56 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.