Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-15 11:24 UTC

hfooladi / pdbrust

A Rust library for parsing PDB (Protein Data Bank) files

RustMIT★ 20 stars⑂ 3 forkssince Mar 2025View on GitHub ↗

hfooladi/pdbrust holds a health index of 60 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (81/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (39/100). It was last updated 78 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

60
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.

60
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 57 is calibrated to 60 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Hosein FooladiPersonal account
68 followers46 public repossince Mar 2015Universität Wien

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 publishTags
crates.iopdbrust0.7.01348151 days agobioinformaticschemistrypdbproteinstructural-biologyparser-implementationsdata-structuresscience
PyPIpdbrust0.7.08634151 days agopdbproteinbioinformaticsstructural-biologymmcifparsing

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

62Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 78 days ago
6.9/36Commit cadence10/52 weeks with commits
17.8/18Commit volume95 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year95
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push78
active_weeks_last_year10
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases3 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 151 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~15.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count3
latest_release_tagv0.7.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release151
mean_days_between_releases15.5
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?

39Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
20.7/60Stars20 stars
2.5/25Forks3 forks
0/15Watchers1 watchers
Inputs used
forks3
stars20
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
40/80Monthly downloads997 downloads/month across crates, pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagespdbrust, pdbrust
dependents
ecosystemscrates, pypi
total_downloads542
monthly_downloads997
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?

48Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.2/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 99% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth2 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.992
How it's scored
21/42Issue resolution50% of issues closed
7.5/30PR acceptance3/12 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs3
open_issues1
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.5
closed_unmerged_prs9
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
13.2/25Owner reach68 followers of HFooladi
24.2/25Track record46 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers68
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginHFooladi
public_repos46
account_age_days4,137
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable2 package(s) on crates, pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 151 days ago
20/20Version history8 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespdbrust, pdbrust
ecosystemscrates, pypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish151

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

81Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests2 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://pypi.org/project/pdbrust/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics7 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscheminformatics, chemistry, mmcif, parser, pdb, rust, structural-biology
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://pypi.org/project/pdbrust/
docs_sitehttps://pypi.org/project/pdbrust/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

54Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests2 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Signed-Releases. 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.

69Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsCLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes31,003
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingpdbrust-python/python/pdbrust/py.typed
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
5/8Automated maintenancedependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configspdbrust-python/python/pdbrust/py.typed
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
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/149 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes52,262
source_files_sampled149
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
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

20GitHub stars
2contributors
95commits, last 12 months
78days since last push
3releases
1bus factor
1open issues
crates.io, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Could not fetch crates package 'pdbrust-python' from its registry

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.4 / 10
5.4aggregate

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 · 2026-07-15 11:24 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
10CI-Tests2 out of 2 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 0/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 14
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iothiserror1.0Cargo.toml
crates.iorayon1.8Cargo.toml
crates.ionalgebra0.32Cargo.toml
crates.ioitertools0.12Cargo.toml
crates.ioreqwest0.12Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioflate21.0Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio1.0Cargo.toml
crates.iofutures0.3Cargo.toml
crates.iopyo30.27pdbrust-python/Cargo.toml
crates.iopdbrustpdbrust-python/Cargo.toml
crates.ionumpy0.27pdbrust-python/Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio1.0pdbrust-python/Cargo.toml
All dependencies 16

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 12 direct and 4 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioflate2direct
crates.iofuturesdirect
crates.ioitertoolsdirect
crates.ionalgebradirect
crates.ionumpydirect
crates.iopyo3direct
crates.iorayondirect
crates.ioreqwestdirect
crates.ioserdedirect
crates.ioserde_jsondirect
crates.iothiserrordirect
crates.iotokiodirect
crates.iocodecovindirect
crates.iocriterionindirect
crates.ioproptestindirect
crates.iotempfileindirect
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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticscrates.io, PyPI.