Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-21 05:06 UTC

hermeticbuild / rules_rs

Next-gen Rust Bazel rules which provide a blazing-fast ergonomic `crate_universe` reimplementation, first-class Windows support, optimized toolchains, and more.

StarlarkApache-2.0★ 107 stars⑂ 65 forkssince Sep 2025View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolhow this is determined
#bazel#cross-compilation#rust#hermetic

hermeticbuild/rules_rs holds a health index of 81 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (99/100) and lowest on Security (52/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

81
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.

81
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 69 is calibrated to 81 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Hermetic BuildOrganization
97 followers37 public repossince Mar 2026

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?

99Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

98Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
33.9/36Commit cadence — 49/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 392 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 12 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year392
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year49

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~7.1 days
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — 5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv0.1.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases7.1

Community & Adoption

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

58Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

48Weak
How it's scored
32.9/60Stars — 107 stars
15.1/25Forks — 65 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks65
stars107
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

70Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
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?

54Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

36Weak
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 85% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 36 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled36
top_contributor_share0.846

Issue & PR responsiveness

72Good
How it's scored
28.7/42Issue resolution — 68% of issues closed
22.6/30PR acceptance — 129/171 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 7/7 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
7.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 15/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
merged_prs129
open_issues32
closed_issues69
prs_merged_7d3
prs_decided_7d3
prs_merged_30d21
prs_decided_30d21
issue_closed_ratio0.683
closed_unmerged_prs42
first_time_authors_30d4
first_time_prs_merged_30d7
first_time_prs_decided_30d7

Ownership & stewardship

57Moderate
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
14.3/25Owner reach — 97 followers of hermeticbuild
12.8/25Track record — 37 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers97
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginhermeticbuild
public_repos37
account_age_days231

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

79Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

92Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 21 out of 23 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsbazel, cross-compilation, rust, hermetic
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

52Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

52Moderate
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
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 21 out of 23 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 15/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
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
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 12 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
7.5/7.5Signed-Releases — 5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 107 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate5.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. 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.

53Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 81 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.81
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

63Moderate
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — rs/private/prost/Cargo.toml, rs/private/pyo3/Cargo.toml, rs/private/wasm_bindgen/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — devcontainer, Dockerfile, lockfile
6/10Demonstrated agent practice — 3 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.03
toolchain_manifestsrs/private/prost/Cargo.toml, rs/private/pyo3/Cargo.toml, rs/private/wasm_bindgen/Cargo.toml, test/Cargo.toml, test/annotation_crate_features/Cargo.toml, test/binaries/Cargo.toml, test/binary_only/Cargo.toml, test/bindgen/Cargo.toml, test/build_dep_features/Cargo.toml, test/build_script_aliases/Cargo.toml, test/build_script_env_select/Cargo.toml, test/build_script_runtime_env/Cargo.toml, test/cargo_manifest_path_env/Cargo.toml, test/cargo_manifest_path_env/manifest_path_probe/Cargo.toml, test/cfg_feature_target_dep/Cargo.toml, test/cfg_feature_target_dep/inner/Cargo.toml, test/empty_workspace/Cargo.toml, test/feature_name_overrides_implicit_dep/Cargo.toml, test/first_party_feature_propagation.deps/dep_leaf/Cargo.toml, test/first_party_feature_propagation/Cargo.toml, test/first_party_feature_propagation/member_bar/Cargo.toml, test/first_party_feature_propagation/member_foo/Cargo.toml, test/git_crates/Cargo.toml, test/git_crates_aliased_deps/Cargo.toml, test/git_non_workspace_root/Cargo.toml, test/many_workspace_deps/Cargo.toml, test/multiple_versions_for_dependency/Cargo.toml, test/multiple_versions_of_optional_dep/Cargo.toml, test/non_optional_dep_feature/Cargo.toml, test/optional_build_deps/Cargo.toml, test/platform_dep_features/Cargo.toml, test/self_dev_dependency/Cargo.toml, test/self_dev_dependency/mycrate/Cargo.toml, test/target_workspace_dep_feature/Cargo.toml, test/target_workspace_dep_feature/app/Cargo.toml, test/unversioned_path_dependency/Cargo.toml, test/unversioned_path_dependency/app/Cargo.toml, test/unversioned_path_dependency/unversioned/Cargo.toml, test/uv/Cargo.toml, test/vendored_crate_override/Cargo.toml, test/vendored_crate_override/app/Cargo.toml, test/vendored_crate_override/vendor/itoa/Cargo.toml, test/vendored_workspace_dep/Cargo.toml, test/vendored_workspace_dep/app/Cargo.toml, test/vendored_workspace_dep/mylib/Cargo.toml, test/vendored_workspace_dep/vendor/itoa/Cargo.toml, test/visibility/workspace/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_default_features/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_default_features/app/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_git_dep/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_git_dep/app/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_hyphen_dep_aliases/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_hyphen_dep_aliases/consumer/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_hyphen_dep_aliases/dep-crate/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_lints/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_lints/opted_in/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_lints/opted_out/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_lints/package_lints/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_member_annotation_features.deps/dep_leaf/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_member_annotation_features/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_member_annotation_features/member_bar/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_member_annotation_features/member_foo/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_path_dependency/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_path_dependency/app/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_renamed_path_dep_aliases/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_renamed_path_dep_aliases/consumer/Cargo.toml, test/workspace_renamed_path_dep_aliases/dep-crate/Cargo.toml, tools/rust_analyzer/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Starlark without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/75 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageStarlark
largest_source_bytes8,618
source_files_sampled75
oversized_source_files0

Machine-readable interfaces

50Moderate
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — test/prost/echo.proto
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs—
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filestest/prost/echo.proto
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

107GitHub stars
36contributors
392commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
32open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch crates package 'rules_rs_rust_analyzer' from its registry
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 65 ⇿
0Stars
65Forks
99Releases

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.

01325385063756322025-102026-042026-10
Major 0Minor 1Patch 98
OpenSSF Scorecard 5.2 / 10
5.2aggregate

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 · 2026-10-21 05:05 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
9CI-Tests21 out of 23 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5Code-ReviewFound 15/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 12 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
1Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
10Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities107 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 9
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.ioanyhow=1.0.102tools/rust_analyzer/Cargo.toml
crates.iocamino=1.2.2tools/rust_analyzer/Cargo.toml
crates.ioclap=4.6.0tools/rust_analyzer/Cargo.toml
crates.ioenv_logger=0.11.10tools/rust_analyzer/Cargo.toml
crates.ioitertools=0.14.0tools/rust_analyzer/Cargo.toml
crates.iojsonc-parser=0.26.2tools/rust_analyzer/Cargo.toml
crates.iolog=0.4.29tools/rust_analyzer/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde=1.0.228tools/rust_analyzer/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json=1.0.149tools/rust_analyzer/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

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 hermeticbuild/rules_rs. Read them side by side →

98TraceMachina/nativelinkNativeLink is a Nix-powered, open source, high-performance build cache and remote execution server, compatible with Bazel, Soong, Pants, Buck2, Reclient, and other RE-compatible build systems. It offers drastically faster builds, reduced test flakiness, and support for specialized hardware.Exceptional94bazelbuild/rules_rustRust rules for BazelExceptional100modelcontextprotocol/rust-sdkThe official Rust SDK for the Model Context ProtocolExceptional100risingwavelabs/risingwaveEvent streaming platform for agentic AI. Continuously ingest, transform, and serve event streams in real time, at scale.Exceptional99ratatui/ratatuiA Rust crate for cooking up terminal user interfaces (TUIs) 👨‍🍳🐀 https://ratatui.rsExceptional99taskforcesh/bullmqBullMQ - Message Queue and Batch processing for NodeJS, Python, .NET, Elixir, Rust and PHP based on Redis or PostgreSQLExceptional

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.