Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-05 16:50 UTC

imagekit-developer / imagekit-ruby

Ruby On Rails SDK for ImageKit.io API.

RubyApache-2.0★ 19 stars⑂ 8 forkssince Mar 2020View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined
#imagekit#rails-sdk#image-manipulation

imagekit-developer/imagekit-ruby holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (90/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (54/100). It was last updated 9 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

86
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.

86
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 72 is calibrated to 86 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

ImagekitOrganization
43 followers44 public repossince Oct 2016

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemsimagekitio4.9.0-3221 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

90Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

84Excellent
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 9 days ago
27/36Commit cadence — 39/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 230 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 18 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year230
human_commit_share0.4
days_since_last_push9
active_weeks_last_year39

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 33 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 21 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~21.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count33
latest_release_tagv4.9.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release21
mean_days_between_releases21.6
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?

54Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

31At Risk
How it's scored
20.4/60Stars — 19 stars
7/25Forks — 8 forks
3.9/15Watchers — 6 watchers
Inputs used
forks8
stars19
watchers6
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

70Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

70Good
How it's scored
56.3/80Total downloads — 263,360 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesimagekitio
dependents—
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads263,360
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?

73Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

63Moderate
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
14.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 36% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 10 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled10
top_contributor_share0.355

Issue & PR responsiveness

72Good
How it's scored
40.1/42Issue resolution — 96% of issues closed
21.4/30PR acceptance — 50/70 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 2/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs50
open_issues1
closed_issues21
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.955
closed_unmerged_prs20
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.

Ownership & stewardship

66Good
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
11.8/25Owner reach — 43 followers of imagekit-developer
24/25Track record — 44 public repos, account ~9 yr old
Inputs used
followers43
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginimagekit-developer
public_repos44
account_age_days3,610

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 21 days ago
20/20Version history — 32 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesimagekitio
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish21

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

84Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 8 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

75Good
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://imagekit.io
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 3 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsimagekit, rails-sdk, image-manipulation
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://imagekit.io
docs_sitehttps://imagekit.io
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

63Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

54Moderate
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 8 out of 8 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
0.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 2/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 18 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
4.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 11 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): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories11
affected_packages5
assessed_packages76
unassessed_packages3
affected_by_severityhigh 4, moderate 1
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 76 resolved dependencies against OSV. 3 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.

57Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 36 of 40 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.9
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

54Moderate
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
2/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
9/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Ruby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/220 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes53,709
source_files_sampled220
oversized_source_files0

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
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

19GitHub stars
10contributors
230commits, last 12 months
9days since last push
33releases
2bus factor
1open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 8 ⇿
0Stars
8Forks
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.

02468812020-042021-122023-08
Major 1Minor 2Patch 12

Each point covers 4 days.

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 · 2026-09-05 16:50 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests8 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 2/14 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10Contributorsproject has 4 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained18 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
9Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
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
0Vulnerabilities11 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 79

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 79 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsactivesupport8.1.1indirect
RubyGemsaddressable2.8.7indirect
RubyGemsast2.4.3indirect
RubyGemsasync2.34.0indirect
RubyGemsbase640.3.0indirect
RubyGemsbenchmark0.5.0indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal3.3.1indirect
RubyGemscgi—indirect
RubyGemscgi0.5.1indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.5indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool—indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool2.5.4indirect
RubyGemsconsole1.34.2indirect
RubyGemscrack1.0.1indirect
RubyGemscsv3.3.5indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.3indirect
RubyGemserubi1.13.1indirect
RubyGemsffi1.17.2indirect
RubyGemsfiber-annotation0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsfiber-local1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsfiber-storage1.0.1indirect
RubyGemsfileutils1.8.0indirect
RubyGemshashdiff1.2.1indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.14.7indirect
RubyGemsio-event1.11.2indirect
RubyGemsjson2.15.2indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.5indirect
RubyGemslint_roller1.1.0indirect
RubyGemslisten3.9.0indirect
RubyGemslogger1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsmetrics0.15.0indirect
RubyGemsminitest5.26.0indirect
RubyGemsminitest-focus1.4.0indirect
RubyGemsminitest-hooks1.5.2indirect
RubyGemsminitest-proveit1.0.0indirect
RubyGemsminitest-rg5.3.0indirect
RubyGemsmutex_m0.3.0indirect
RubyGemsnetrc0.11.0indirect
RubyGemsparallel1.27.0indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.10.0indirect
RubyGemsprettier_print1.2.1indirect
RubyGemsprism1.6.0indirect
RubyGemspublic_suffix6.0.2indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrake13.3.1indirect
RubyGemsrb-fsevent0.11.2indirect
RubyGemsrb-inotify0.11.1indirect
RubyGemsrbi0.3.7indirect
RubyGemsrbs3.9.5indirect
RubyGemsredcarpet3.6.1indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.11.3indirect
RubyGemsrexml3.4.4indirect
RubyGemsrubocop1.81.7indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.47.1indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemssecurerandom0.4.1indirect
RubyGemssorbet0.6.12690indirect
RubyGemssorbet-runtime0.6.12690indirect
RubyGemssorbet-static0.6.12690indirect
RubyGemssorbet-static-and-runtime0.6.12690indirect
RubyGemsspoom1.6.3indirect
RubyGemsstandardwebhooks—indirect
RubyGemsstandardwebhooks1.1.0indirect
RubyGemssteep1.10.0indirect
RubyGemsstrscan3.1.5indirect
RubyGemssyntax_tree6.3.0indirect
RubyGemstapioca0.16.11indirect
RubyGemsterminal-table4.0.0indirect
RubyGemsthor1.4.0indirect
RubyGemstraces0.18.2indirect
RubyGemstzinfo2.0.6indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-emoji4.1.0indirect
RubyGemsuri1.1.0indirect
RubyGemswebmock3.26.1indirect
RubyGemswebrick1.9.1indirect
RubyGemsyard0.9.37indirect
RubyGemsyard-sorbet0.9.0indirect
Dependency advisories 5

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 76 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 5 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 3 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
activesupport8.1.1indirecthigh38.1.2.1
addressable2.8.7indirecthigh12.9.0
concurrent-ruby1.3.5indirecthigh31.3.7
json2.15.2indirecthigh22.19.9
yard0.9.37indirectmoderate20.9.44

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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with imagekit-developer/imagekit-ruby. Read them side by side →

87imagekit-developer/imagekit-nodejsNode.js SDK for ImageKit.io API.Excellent31imagekit-developer/imagekit-phpPHP SDK for ImageKit.io API.At Risk88ValentinH/react-easy-cropA React component to crop images/videos with easy interactionsExcellent77php-imagine/ImaginePHP Object Oriented image manipulation libraryGood77fineshopdesign/cf-wasm⛅ A collection of WASM packages those work on Cloudflare WorkersGood77libvips/pyvipspython binding for libvips using cffiGood

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 — RubyGems.