Public record
Software health reportschema 0.16.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-20 15:27 UTC

huacnlee / rails-settings-cached

Global settings for your Rails application.

RubyCustom license★ 1,122 stars⑂ 204 forkssince Jan 2011View on GitHub ↗

huacnlee/rails-settings-cached holds a health index of 51 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (68/100) and lowest on Vitality (21/100). It was last updated 587 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

51
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.

51
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 51 is calibrated to 51 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Jason LeePersonal account
5,338 followers177 public repossince Apr 2008@longbridge

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
RubyGemsrails-settings-cached2.9.6-66587 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

21At Risk · 21% of overall
How it's scored
0/36Push recencylast push 587 days ago
0/36Commit cadence0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume0 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_year0
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push587
active_weeks_last_year0
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases29 releases published
7.2/36Release recencylatest release 587 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~130.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count29
latest_release_tagv2.9.6
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release587
mean_days_between_releases130.3
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?

68Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
49.5/60Stars1,122 stars
19.2/25Forks204 forks
5/15Watchers9 watchers
Inputs used
forks204
stars1,122
watchers9
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5Licenselicense file present, not a recognized license
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
73.1/80Total downloads10,759,892 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesrails-settings-cached
dependents
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads10,759,892
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?

64Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 80% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth48 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled48
top_contributor_share0.795
How it's scored
39.8/42Issue resolution95% of issues closed
20.2/30PR acceptance86/128 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 7/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs86
open_issues7
closed_issues125
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.947
closed_unmerged_prs42
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
25/25Owner reach5,338 followers of huacnlee
25/25Track record177 public repos, account ~18 yr old
Inputs used
followers5,338
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginhuacnlee
public_repos177
account_age_days6,678
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on rubygems
14/35Publish recencylatest publish 587 days ago
20/20Version history66 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesrails-settings-cached
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish587

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

59Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsconfiguration, config, rails, setting
has_wikino
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

50Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 7/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packagingno data
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
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities55 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate3.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories55
affected_packages8
assessed_packages56
unassessed_packages7
affected_by_severitycritical 1, high 5, low 2
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. 7 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.

28At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
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
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeRuby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/50 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes15,138
source_files_sampled50
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

1,122GitHub stars
48contributors
0commits, last 12 months
587days since last push
29releases
1bus factor
7open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.7 / 10
3.7aggregate

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 · 2026-07-20 15:26 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
0CI-Tests0 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 7/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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
0Vulnerabilities55 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsrailties~> 8.0.0.beta1Gemfile
RubyGemsactiverecord~> 8.0.0.beta1Gemfile
All dependencies 63

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 59 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsactiverecorddirect
RubyGemsactiverecord8.0.0.beta1direct
RubyGemsrailtiesdirect
RubyGemsrailties8.0.0.beta1direct
RubyGemsactionpack8.0.0.beta1indirect
RubyGemsactionview8.0.0.beta1indirect
RubyGemsactivemodel8.0.0.beta1indirect
RubyGemsactivesupport8.0.0.beta1indirect
RubyGemsast2.4.2indirect
RubyGemsbase640.2.0indirect
RubyGemsbenchmark0.3.0indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal3.1.8indirect
RubyGemsbuilder3.3.0indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.4indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool2.4.1indirect
RubyGemscrass1.0.6indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.1indirect
RubyGemserubi1.13.0indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.14.6indirect
RubyGemsio-console0.7.2indirect
RubyGemsirb1.14.1indirect
RubyGemsjson2.7.2indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.3indirect
RubyGemslogger1.6.1indirect
RubyGemsloofah2.22.0indirect
RubyGemsmini_portile22.8.7indirect
RubyGemsminitestindirect
RubyGemsminitest5.25.1indirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.16.7indirect
RubyGemsparallel1.26.3indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.5.0indirect
RubyGemspgindirect
RubyGemspg1.5.8indirect
RubyGemspsych5.1.2indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrack3.1.7indirect
RubyGemsrack-session2.0.0indirect
RubyGemsrack-test2.1.0indirect
RubyGemsrackup2.1.0indirect
RubyGemsrails-dom-testing2.2.0indirect
RubyGemsrails-html-sanitizer1.6.0indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrakeindirect
RubyGemsrake13.2.1indirect
RubyGemsrdoc6.7.0indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.9.2indirect
RubyGemsreline0.5.10indirect
RubyGemsrubocopindirect
RubyGemsrubocop1.66.1indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.32.3indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemssecurerandom0.3.1indirect
RubyGemssqlite3indirect
RubyGemssqlite32.1.0indirect
RubyGemsstringio3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsthor1.3.2indirect
RubyGemstimeout0.4.1indirect
RubyGemstzinfo2.0.6indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width2.6.0indirect
RubyGemsuri0.13.1indirect
RubyGemsuseragent0.16.10indirect
RubyGemswebrick1.8.2indirect
RubyGemszeitwerk2.6.18indirect
Dependency advisories 8

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: 8 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 7 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
rack-session2.0.0indirectcritical22.1.2
activesupport8.0.0.beta1indirecthigh38.1.2.1
concurrent-ruby1.3.4indirecthigh31.3.7
nokogiri1.16.7indirecthigh151.19.4
rack3.1.7indirecthigh243.2.6
uri0.13.1indirecthigh21.0.4
actionview8.0.0.beta1indirectlow18.1.2.1
rails-html-sanitizer1.6.0indirectlow51.6.1

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 v0.16.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsRubyGems.