Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-14 00:11 UTC

ilhajs / ilha

The most versatile web UI library: ship minimal JavaScript, hydrate only what matters.

TypeScriptMIT★ 155 stars⑂ 7 forkssince Mar 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryWeb interfacehow this is determined

ilhajs/ilha holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (88/100) and lowest on Security (39/100). It was last updated 6 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

71
overall / 100
Good

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.

71
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 63 is calibrated to 71 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

IlhaOrganization
5 followers6 public repossince Apr 2026

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

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

88Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 6 days ago
15.9/36Commit cadence23/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume280 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year280
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push6
active_weeks_last_year23

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases26 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 12 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~8.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count26
latest_release_tag0.14.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release12
mean_days_between_releases8.2
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?

51Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
35.5/60Stars155 stars
6.5/25Forks7 forks
0/15Watchers1 watchers
Inputs used
forks7
stars155
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_badges4
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesbadgen.net, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
52/80Monthly downloads7,936 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesilha, @ilha/astro, @ilha/router
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads7,936
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?

58Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.3/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 99% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth4 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.986
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
29.7/30PR acceptance96/97 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs96
open_issues0
closed_issues3
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d17
prs_decided_30d17
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs1
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 backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
5.6/25Owner reach5 followers of ilhajs
7/25Track record6 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers5
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginilhajs
public_repos6
account_age_days158

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable3 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 6 days ago
20/20Version history66 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesilha, @ilha/astro, @ilha/router
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish6

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

69Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests12 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://ilha.build/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics13 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsedge, framework, full-stack, hybrid, island, library, node, ssr, template, ui, universal, vanilla-javascript, jsx
has_wikino
homepagehttps://ilha.build/
docs_sitehttps://ilha.build/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

39Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.2/2.5CI-Tests12 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
1.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
5.2/7.5Vulnerabilities3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate3.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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.

73Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)llms.txt served by the project website (https://ilha.build/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history99 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://ilha.build/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.99
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes13,567
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingapps/website/tsconfig.json, packages/astro/tsconfig.json, packages/ilha/tsconfig.json, packages/router/tsconfig.json, templates/oxide-spa/tsconfig.json, templates/vite-spa/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
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_configsapps/website/tsconfig.json, packages/astro/tsconfig.json, packages/ilha/tsconfig.json, packages/router/tsconfig.json, templates/oxide-spa/tsconfig.json, templates/vite-spa/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeTypeScript (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/157 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes44,022
source_files_sampled157
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 examplesrecipes
Inputs used
example_dirsrecipes
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

155GitHub stars
4contributors
280commits, last 12 months
6days since last push
26releases
1bus factor
0open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 7 ⇿
0Stars
7Forks
15Releases

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.

1234567712026-032026-052026-06
Major 0Minor 7Patch 8
OpenSSF Scorecard 3.9 / 10
3.9aggregate

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 · 2026-09-14 00:11 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
9CI-Tests12 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 2 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
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7Vulnerabilities3 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 19
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@fontsource-variable/geist^5.3.0apps/website/package.json
npm@fontsource-variable/geist-mono^5.3.0apps/website/package.json
npm@ilha/astroworkspace:*apps/website/package.json
npm@ilha/routerworkspace:*apps/website/package.json
npmastro^7.2.9apps/website/package.json
npmastro-icon^1.1.5apps/website/package.json
npmilhaworkspace:*apps/website/package.json
npmrangi^2.2.0apps/website/package.json
npmshiki^4.4.3apps/website/package.json
npmsonner^2.0.8apps/website/package.json
npmzod^4.4.3apps/website/package.json
npmeffect4.0.0-rc.112packages/router/package.json
npmunplugin3.3.0packages/router/package.json
npm@ilha/router^0.11.8templates/oxide-spa/package.json
npmeffect^4.0.0-rc.112templates/oxide-spa/package.json
npmilha^0.14.5templates/oxide-spa/package.json
npm@ilha/router^0.11.8templates/vite-spa/package.json
npmeffect^4.0.0-rc.112templates/vite-spa/package.json
npmilha^0.14.5templates/vite-spa/package.json
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.

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 statisticsnpm.