Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-21 21:45 UTC

inveniosoftware / invenio-base

Base package for building the Invenio application.

PythonMIT★ 4 stars⑂ 48 forkssince Aug 2015View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolPluginLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined

inveniosoftware/invenio-base holds a health index of 67 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (81/100) and lowest on Vitality (39/100). It was last updated 97 days ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

67
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.

67
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 61 is calibrated to 67 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

214 followers171 public repossince Oct 2011

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIinvenio-base2.4.143,9115497 days agoinvenio

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

39Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
9.9/36Push recency — last push 97 days ago
4.8/36Commit cadence — 7/52 weeks with commits
8.6/18Commit volume — 8 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year8
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push97
active_weeks_last_year7
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 37 version tags (no GitHub releases)
27/36Release recency — latest release 97 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~124.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count37
latest_release_tagv2.4.1
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release97
mean_days_between_releases124.4
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?

59Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
7.7/60Stars — 4 stars
13.9/25Forks — 48 forks
10.6/15Watchers — 81 watchers
Inputs used
forks48
stars4
watchers81
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
61.9/80Monthly downloads — 43,911 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesinvenio-base
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads43,911
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?

81Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor — 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
16.4/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 27% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 51 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 38 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled51
top_contributor_share0.273
How it's scored
37/42Issue resolution — 88% of issues closed
26.6/30PR acceptance — 135/152 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
7.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 11/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
merged_prs135
open_issues6
closed_issues45
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.882
closed_unmerged_prs17
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
16.8/25Owner reach — 214 followers of inveniosoftware
25/25Track record — 171 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers214
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_logininveniosoftware
public_repos171
account_age_days5,472

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 97 days ago
20/20Version history — 54 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesinvenio-base
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish97

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.isort])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
4/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 4 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

80Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://invenio-base.readthedocs.io
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikino
homepagehttps://invenio-base.readthedocs.io
docs_sitehttps://invenio-base.readthedocs.io
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

52Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
0.5/2.5CI-Tests — 4 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 11/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 38 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not 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_aggregate4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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
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_packages11
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 pypi:invenio-base@2.4.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 11 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.

47Weak · 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 — 94 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.94
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — docs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.isort])
0/11Static type checking
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_languageno
bootstrap_filesdocs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/25 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes12,093
source_files_sampled25
oversized_source_files0
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—
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

4GitHub stars
51contributors
8commits, last 12 months
97days since last push
37releases
3bus factor
6open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 48 ⇿
0Stars
48Forks
36Releases

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.

010203040504752015-092021-012026-05
Major 2Minor 11Patch 23

Each point covers 10 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.0 / 10
4.0aggregate

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 · 2026-10-21 21:44 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
2CI-Tests4 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5Code-ReviewFound 11/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
10Contributorsproject has 38 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 8
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIblinker>=1.4pyproject.toml
PyPIflask>=3.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIimportlib-metadata>=4.4pyproject.toml
PyPIimportlib-resources>=5.0pyproject.toml
PyPIitsdangerous>=2.1.0pyproject.toml
PyPImarkupsafe>=0.23pyproject.toml
PyPIwatchdog>2.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIwerkzeug>=3.0.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 12

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 8 direct and 4 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIblinker—direct
PyPIflask—direct
PyPIimportlib-metadata—direct
PyPIimportlib-resources—direct
PyPIitsdangerous—direct
PyPImarkupsafe—direct
PyPIwatchdog—direct
PyPIwerkzeug—direct
PyPIfreezegun—indirect
PyPIpytest-black-ng—indirect
PyPIpytest-invenio—indirect
PyPIsphinx—indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:invenio-base@2.4.1 pulls in 11 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 — PyPI.