Public record
Software health reportschema 0.30.0 · metrics 2.5.0 · 2026-08-03 04:06 UTC

hyperium / h2

HTTP 2.0 client & server implementation for Rust.

RustMIT★ 1,534 stars⑂ 363 forkssince Mar 2017View on GitHub ↗

hyperium/h2 holds a health index of 87 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (88/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (51/100). It was last updated 5 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

87
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.

87
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 73 is calibrated to 87 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

hyperiumOrganization
604 followers14 public repossince Sep 2014

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.ioh20.4.1550,994,6978348 days agoasynchttpnon-blockingnetwork-programmingweb-programmingasynchronous

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

81Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 5 days ago
13.8/36Commit cadence — 20/52 weeks with commits
14/18Commit volume — 35 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 14 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year35
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push5
active_weeks_last_year20
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 51 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 48 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~73.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count51
latest_release_tagv0.4.15
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release48
mean_days_between_releases73.9
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?

88Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
51.7/60Stars — 1,534 stars
21.3/25Forks — 363 forks
9/15Watchers — 42 watchers
Inputs used
forks363
stars1,534
watchers42
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 50,994,697 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesh2
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads721,742,692
monthly_downloads50,994,697
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?

75Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15.1/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 33% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 99 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 23 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled99
top_contributor_share0.328
How it's scored
32.6/42Issue resolution — 78% of issues closed
26.5/30PR acceptance — 546/619 decided PRs merged
4.3/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/3 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
10.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 21/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
merged_prs546
open_issues60
closed_issues208
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d3
prs_merged_30d4
prs_decided_30d7
issue_closed_ratio0.776
closed_unmerged_prs73
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d3
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
20/25Owner reach — 604 followers of hyperium
20.6/25Track record — 14 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers604
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginhyperium
public_repos14
account_age_days4,344

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 48 days ago
20/20Version history — 83 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesh2
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish48

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

61Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 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

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsrust, tokio, http2
has_wikino
homepage
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

64Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 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
5.2/7.5Code-Review — Found 21/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 23 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
5/5Fuzzing — project is fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 14 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
4.5/5Security-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_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate6.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): branch_protection, packaging, 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.

51Moderate · 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 — 84 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
legible_history_share0.84
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — Cargo.toml, fuzz/Cargo.toml, tests/h2-fuzz/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Rust (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency 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_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, fuzz/Cargo.toml, tests/h2-fuzz/Cargo.toml, tests/h2-support/Cargo.toml, tests/h2-tests/Cargo.toml, util/genfixture/Cargo.toml, util/genhuff/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
51.8/55Manageable file sizes — 5/86 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes110,243
source_files_sampled86
oversized_source_files5
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
0/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files

Key facts

1,534GitHub stars
99contributors
35commits, last 12 months
5days since last push
51releases
2bus factor
60open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 363 ⇿
0Stars
363Forks
51Releases

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.

012525037533872017-082022-022026-07
Major 0Minor 3Patch 48

Each point covers 9 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.4 / 10
6.4aggregate

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 · 2026-08-03 04:06 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-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7Code-ReviewFound 21/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
10Contributorsproject has 23 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained14 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
9Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 11
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.ioatomic-waker1.0.0Cargo.toml
crates.iofutures-core0.3Cargo.toml
crates.iofutures-sink0.3Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio-util0.7.1Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio1Cargo.toml
crates.iobytes1Cargo.toml
crates.iohttp1.1Cargo.toml
crates.iotracing0.1.35Cargo.toml
crates.iofnv1.0.5Cargo.toml
crates.ioslab0.4.2Cargo.toml
crates.ioindexmap2Cargo.toml
All dependencies 28

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 11 direct and 17 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioatomic-wakerdirect
crates.iobytesdirect
crates.iofnvdirect
crates.iofutures-coredirect
crates.iofutures-sinkdirect
crates.iohttpdirect
crates.ioindexmapdirect
crates.ioslabdirect
crates.iotokiodirect
crates.iotokio-utildirect
crates.iotracingdirect
crates.ioarbitraryindirect
crates.ioattyindirect
crates.ioenv_loggerindirect
crates.iofuturesindirect
crates.iohexindirect
crates.iohonggfuzzindirect
crates.iolibfuzzer-sysindirect
crates.ioquickcheckindirect
crates.iorandindirect
crates.ioserdeindirect
crates.ioserde_jsonindirect
crates.iotokio-rustlsindirect
crates.iotokio-testindirect
crates.iotracing-subscriberindirect
crates.iotracing-treeindirect
crates.iowalkdirindirect
crates.iowebpki-rootsindirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

Raw JSON report machine-readable

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 v2.5.0, schema v0.30.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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