Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-22 14:31 UTC

i18next / i18next-resources-to-backend

This package helps to transform resources to an i18next backend

JavaScript · TypeScriptMIT★ 67 stars⑂ 4 forkssince May 2021View on GitHub ↗

i18next/i18next-resources-to-backend holds a health index of 60 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (73/100) and lowest on Security (21/100). It was last updated 50 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

i18nextOrganization
264 followers58 public repossince Aug 2014

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npmi18next-resources-to-backend1.2.35,835,1951082 days agoi18nexti18next-backendi18next-chained-backend

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

50Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 50 days ago
4.8/36Commit cadence — 7/52 weeks with commits
9.7/18Commit volume — 11 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — no data
Inputs used
commits_last_year11
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push50
active_weeks_last_year7
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 10 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recency — latest release 82 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~210.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count10
latest_release_tagv1.2.3
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release82
mean_days_between_releases210.5

Community & Adoption

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

68Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
29.5/60Stars — 67 stars
4/25Forks — 4 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks4
stars67
watchers2
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
0/13.5Code of conduct
7.2/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges3
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 5,835,195 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesi18next-resources-to-backend
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads5,835,195
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?

68Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2.2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 90% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 4 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — no data
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.902
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance — 5/5 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — no data
Inputs used
merged_prs5
open_issues0
closed_issues11
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs0
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
0/20Verified domain
17.4/25Owner reach — 264 followers of i18next
24.9/25Track record — 58 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers264
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_logini18next
public_repos58
account_age_days4,441

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 82 days ago
20/20Version history — 10 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesi18next-resources-to-backend
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish82

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

73Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .eslintrc
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
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?

21At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
0/25Dependabot config
0/25Dependency lockfiles — published library — lockfiles are an application concern, not expected
0/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfiles—
manifestspackage.json
has_codeql_workflowno
has_security_policyno
has_dependabot_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dependency lockfiles. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages1
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the npm:i18next-resources-to-backend@1.2.3 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 1 packages. 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.

50Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
12.5/40Legible commit history — 12 of 51 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.235
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .eslintrc
11/11Static type checking — tsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 51
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — JavaScript with type-check config (tsconfig.json)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/9 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes2,642
source_files_sampled9
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

67GitHub stars
4contributors
11commits, last 12 months
50days since last push
10releases
1bus factor
0open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • OpenSSF Scorecard did not return a usable result (exit code 0; Skipping github.com/i18next/i18next-resources-to-backend: run: internal error: ListCommits:error during graphqlHandler.setup: internal error: githubv4.Query: Something went wrong while executing your query on 2026-10-22T14:31:49Z. Please include `AFF6:9343F:7DC2D07:B6777A3:6ADA1E53` when reporting this issue.); skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 4 ⇿
0Stars
4Forks
7Releases

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.

1223344412021-072022-122024-05
Major 0Minor 2Patch 5

Each point covers 3 days.

Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@babel/runtime^7.23.2package.json
All dependencies 29

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 28 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@babel/runtime^7.23.2direct
npm@babel/core^7.23.3indirect
npm@babel/plugin-transform-runtime^7.23.3indirect
npm@babel/preset-env^7.23.3indirect
npm@rollup/plugin-babel^6.0.4indirect
npm@rollup/plugin-commonjs^25.0.7indirect
npm@rollup/plugin-node-resolve^15.2.3indirect
npm@rollup/plugin-terser^0.4.4indirect
npm@types/mocha^10.0.4indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/eslint-plugin^6.10.0indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/parser^6.10.0indirect
npmbabel-plugin-add-module-exports^1.0.4indirect
npmeslint^8.53.0indirect
npmeslint-config-standard^17.1.0indirect
npmeslint-plugin-import^2.29.0indirect
npmeslint-plugin-n^16.3.1indirect
npmeslint-plugin-promise^6.1.1indirect
npmeslint-plugin-require-path-exists^1.1.9indirect
npmeslint-plugin-standard^5.0.0indirect
npmi18next22.4.10indirect
npmi18next^23.7.1indirect
npmi18next-chained-backend^4.6.2indirect
npmi18next-resources-to-backend1.1.2indirect
npmmocha^10.2.0indirect
npmrollup^4.3.0indirect
npmshould^13.2.3indirect
npmsinon^17.0.1indirect
npmtsd^0.29.0indirect
npmtypescript^5.2.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing npm:i18next-resources-to-backend@1.2.3 pulls in 1 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

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 — npm.