Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-12 01:38 UTC

indygreg / python-zstandard

Python bindings to the Zstandard (zstd) compression library

C · PythonBSD-3-Clause★ 640 stars⑂ 116 forkssince Sep 2016View on GitHub ↗

indygreg/python-zstandard holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (86/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (55/100). It was last updated 5 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

80
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.

80
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Gregory SzorcPersonal account
628 followers102 public repossince Jul 2010

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 publishTags
PyPIzstandard0.25.0171,755,75142362 days agozstandardzstdcompression

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

61Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 5 days ago
3.5/36Commit cadence — 5/52 weeks with commits
14.6/18Commit volume — 41 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year41
human_commit_share0.76
days_since_last_push5
active_weeks_last_year5
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 23 releases published
16.2/36Release recency — latest release 362 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~191.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count23
latest_release_tag0.25.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release362
mean_days_between_releases191.1

Community & Adoption

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

77Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
45.5/60Stars — 640 stars
17.2/25Forks — 116 forks
5.8/15Watchers — 12 watchers
Inputs used
forks116
stars640
watchers12
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (BSD-3-Clause)
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
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 171,755,751 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageszstandard
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads171,755,751
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?

55Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.4/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 94% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 44 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled44
top_contributor_share0.94
How it's scored
27.9/42Issue resolution — 66% of issues closed
10.8/30PR acceptance — 45/125 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs45
open_issues65
closed_issues129
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.665
closed_unmerged_prs80
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
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
20.1/25Owner reach — 628 followers of indygreg
25/25Track record — 102 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers628
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginindygreg
public_repos102
account_age_days5,893
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
26/35Publish recency — latest publish 362 days ago
20/20Version history — 42 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageszstandard
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish362

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

86Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 10 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 21 out of 21 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

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://python-zstandard.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspython, zstd, zstandard
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://python-zstandard.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

65Good · 16% of overall
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 — 21 out of 21 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
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
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 — 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
4/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
4.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 4 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate6.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
14/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: pyo3 0.25.1 (high 7.5)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
33.7/40No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 92 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories7
affected_packages3
assessed_packages105
unassessed_packages1
affected_by_severityhigh 1, moderate 1, unknown 1
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 105 resolved dependencies against OSV. 1 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.

73Good · 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 — 73 of 76 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.961
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Justfile, docs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checking — zstandard/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 24 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock, uv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesJustfile, docs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configszstandard/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.24
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — C (statically typed)
52.4/55Manageable file sizes — 4/85 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC
largest_source_bytes2,233,611
source_files_sampled85
oversized_source_files4

Key facts

640GitHub stars
44contributors
41commits, last 12 months
5days since last push
23releases
1bus factor
65open issues
crates.io, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch crates package 'python-zstandard' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 116 ⇿
0Stars
116Forks
23Releases

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.

02040608010012011442016-122021-102026-08
Major 0Minor 15Patch 8

Each point covers 9 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.5 / 10
6.5aggregate

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 · 2026-09-12 01:37 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests21 out of 21 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
8Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
6Vulnerabilities4 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iolibc0.2.175Cargo.toml
crates.ionum_cpus1.17.0Cargo.toml
crates.iorayon1.11.0Cargo.toml
crates.iozstd-safe7.2.4Cargo.toml
crates.iozstd-sys2.0.16Cargo.toml
crates.iopyo30.25.1Cargo.toml
All dependencies 106

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 6 direct and 100 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.iolibc0.2.175direct
crates.ionum_cpus1.17.0direct
crates.iopyo30.25.1direct
crates.iorayon1.11.0direct
crates.iozstd-safe7.2.4direct
crates.iozstd-sys2.0.16+zstd.1.5.7direct
crates.ioaho-corasick1.1.3indirect
crates.ioautocfg1.5.0indirect
crates.iobindgen0.72.1indirect
crates.iobitflags2.9.4indirect
crates.iocc1.2.37indirect
crates.iocexpr0.6.0indirect
crates.iocfg-if1.0.3indirect
crates.ioclang-sys1.8.1indirect
crates.iocrossbeam-deque0.8.6indirect
crates.iocrossbeam-epoch0.9.18indirect
crates.iocrossbeam-utils0.8.21indirect
crates.ioeither1.15.0indirect
crates.iofind-msvc-tools0.1.1indirect
crates.iogetrandom0.3.3indirect
crates.ioglob0.3.3indirect
crates.ioheck0.5.0indirect
crates.iohermit-abi0.5.2indirect
crates.ioindoc2.0.6indirect
crates.ioitertools0.13.0indirect
crates.iojobserver0.1.34indirect
crates.iolibloading0.8.8indirect
crates.iomemchr2.7.5indirect
crates.iomemoffset0.9.1indirect
crates.iominimal-lexical0.2.1indirect
crates.ionom7.1.3indirect
crates.ioonce_cell1.21.3indirect
crates.iopkg-config0.3.32indirect
crates.ioportable-atomic1.11.1indirect
crates.ioproc-macro21.0.101indirect
crates.iopyo3-build-config0.25.1indirect
crates.iopyo3-ffi0.25.1indirect
crates.iopyo3-macros0.25.1indirect
crates.iopyo3-macros-backend0.25.1indirect
crates.ioquote1.0.40indirect
crates.ior-efi5.3.0indirect
crates.iorayon-core1.13.0indirect
crates.ioregex1.11.2indirect
crates.ioregex-automata0.4.10indirect
crates.ioregex-syntax0.8.6indirect
crates.iorustc-hash2.1.1indirect
crates.ioshlex1.3.0indirect
crates.iosyn2.0.106indirect
crates.iotarget-lexicon0.13.3indirect
crates.iounicode-ident1.0.19indirect
crates.iounindent0.2.4indirect
crates.iowasi0.14.5+wasi-0.2.4indirect
crates.iowasip21.0.0+wasi-0.2.4indirect
crates.iowindows-link0.1.3indirect
crates.iowindows-targets0.53.3indirect
crates.iowindows_aarch64_gnullvm0.53.0indirect
crates.iowindows_aarch64_msvc0.53.0indirect
crates.iowindows_i686_gnu0.53.0indirect
crates.iowindows_i686_gnullvm0.53.0indirect
crates.iowindows_i686_msvc0.53.0indirect
crates.iowindows_x86_64_gnu0.53.0indirect
crates.iowindows_x86_64_gnullvm0.53.0indirect
crates.iowindows_x86_64_msvc0.53.0indirect
crates.iowit-bindgen0.45.1indirect
PyPIalabaster1.0.0indirect
PyPIattrs25.3.0indirect
PyPIbabel2.17.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2025.8.3indirect
PyPIcffi1.17.1indirect
PyPIcffi2.0.0b1indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.3indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIdocutils0.21.2indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.0indirect
PyPIexecnet2.1.1indirect
PyPIhypothesis—indirect
PyPIhypothesis6.111.0indirect
PyPIidna3.15indirect
PyPIimagesize1.4.1indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.1.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.2indirect
PyPImypy1.17.1indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPIpackaging25.0indirect
PyPIpathspec0.12.1indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpycparser2.22indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpytest8.4.1indirect
PyPIpytest-xdist3.8.0indirect
PyPIrequests2.33.0indirect
PyPIroman-numerals-py3.1.0indirect
PyPIsnowballstemmer3.0.1indirect
PyPIsortedcontainers2.4.0indirect
PyPIsphinx8.2.3indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-applehelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-devhelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-htmlhelp2.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jsmath1.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-qthelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-serializinghtml2.0.0indirect
PyPItomli2.2.1indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.14.1indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIwheel0.46.2indirect
Dependency advisories 3

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 105 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 3 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct. 1 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
pyo30.25.1directhigh40.29.0
pytest8.4.1indirectmoderate29.0.3
crossbeam-epoch0.9.18indirectunknown10.9.20

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 — PyPI.