Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-18 17:58 UTC

jenkinsci / analysis-model

A library to read static analysis reports into a Java object model

JavaMIT★ 92 stars⑂ 195 forkssince Sep 2014View on GitHub ↗

jenkinsci/analysis-model holds a health index of 91 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (98/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (53/100). It was last updated 6 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

91
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.

91
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 77 is calibrated to 91 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

JenkinsOrganization · verified domain
3,942 followers2,800 public repossince Jul 2009

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Mavenedu.hm.hafner:analysis-model14.20.0-5611 days ago
npmanalysis-model0.0.0-beta.290331886 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

98Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 6 days ago
33.2/36Commit cadence — 48/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 739 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_year739
human_commit_share0.82
days_since_last_push6
active_weeks_last_year48

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 11 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~14.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv14.20.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release11
mean_days_between_releases14.4
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?

76Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
31.8/60Stars — 92 stars
19.1/25Forks — 195 forks
11/15Watchers — 96 watchers
Inputs used
forks195
stars92
watchers96
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

76Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 73% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 97 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 15 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled97
top_contributor_share0.734
How it's scored
41.1/42Issue resolution — 98% of issues closed
23/30PR acceptance — 1,114/1,451 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs1,114
open_issues3
closed_issues141
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d5
prs_decided_30d6
issue_closed_ratio0.979
closed_unmerged_prs337
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 3,942 followers of jenkinsci
25/25Track record — 2,800 public repos, account ~17 yr old
Inputs used
followers3,942
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginjenkinsci
public_repos2,800
account_age_days6,297

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 2 package(s) on maven, npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 11 days ago
20/20Version history — 56 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesedu.hm.hafner:analysis-model, analysis-model
ecosystemsmaven, npm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish11

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

77Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 13 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 7 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://plugins.jenkins.io/analysis-model-api
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 8 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsjava, static-analysis, static-code-analysis, checkstyle, spotbugs, pmd, eslint, hacktoberfest
has_wikino
homepagehttps://plugins.jenkins.io/analysis-model-api
docs_sitehttps://plugins.jenkins.io/analysis-model-api
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

57Moderate · 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 — 7 out of 7 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 1/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 15 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — 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
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file 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_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.7
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.

53Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
15/40Legible commit history — 23 of 82 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.28
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — pom.xml, src/test/resources/edu/hm/hafner/analysis/pom.xml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Java (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 18 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestspom.xml, src/test/resources/edu/hm/hafner/analysis/pom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.18
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Java (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/704 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJava
largest_source_bytes57,845
source_files_sampled704
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

92GitHub stars
97contributors
739commits, last 12 months
6days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
3open issues
Maven, npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • OSV advisory lookup failed: [Errno 101] Network is unreachable

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 195 ⇿
0Stars
195Forks
98Releases

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.

04080120160200195122017-102022-042026-10
Major 3Minor 77Patch 18

Each point covers 9 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.7 / 10
5.7aggregate

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 · 2026-10-18 17:57 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests7 out of 7 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 1/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 15 contributing companies or organizations
0Dangerous-Workflowdangerous 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
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 19
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmremark-cli^12.0.0package.json
npmremark-lint^10.0.0package.json
npmremark-preset-lint-recommended^7.0.0package.json
Mavennet.sf.saxon:Saxon-HE13.0pom.xml
Mavencom.github.spotbugs:spotbugs${spotbugs.api.version}pom.xml
Mavencom.j2html:j2html${j2html.version}pom.xml
Mavencommons-beanutils:commons-beanutils${commons-beanutils.version}pom.xml
Mavencommons-io:commons-io${commons.io.version}pom.xml
Mavennet.minidev:json-smart${json-smart.version}pom.xml
Mavennet.sourceforge.pmd:pmd-core${pmd.api.version}pom.xml
Mavennet.sourceforge.pmd:pmd-java${pmd.api.version}pom.xml
Mavenorg.apache.commons:commons-digester3${commons.digester.version}pom.xml
Mavenorg.apache.commons:commons-text${commons.text.version}pom.xml
Mavenorg.json:json${json.version}pom.xml
Mavenorg.jsoup:jsoup${jsoup.version}pom.xml
Mavenorg.slf4j:slf4j-api${slf4j.version}pom.xml
Mavense.bjurr.violations:violations-lib${violations-lib.version}pom.xml
Mavenxerces:xercesImpl2.12.2pom.xml
Mavenio.jenkins.tools.incrementals:incrementals-enforcer-rules1.13pom.xml
All dependencies 33

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 19 direct and 14 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavencom.github.spotbugs:spotbugs4.10.5direct
Mavencom.j2html:j2html1.4.0direct
Mavencommons-beanutils:commons-beanutils1.11.0direct
Mavencommons-io:commons-io2.22.0direct
Mavenio.jenkins.tools.incrementals:incrementals-enforcer-rules1.13direct
Mavennet.minidev:json-smart2.6.0direct
Mavennet.sf.saxon:Saxon-HE13.0direct
Mavennet.sourceforge.pmd:pmd-core7.28.0direct
Mavennet.sourceforge.pmd:pmd-java7.28.0direct
Mavenorg.apache.commons:commons-digester33.2direct
Mavenorg.apache.commons:commons-text1.15.0direct
Mavenorg.json:json20260814direct
Mavenorg.jsoup:jsoup1.23.2direct
Mavenorg.slf4j:slf4j-api2.0.20direct
Mavense.bjurr.violations:violations-lib3.0.2direct
Mavenxerces:xercesImpl2.12.2direct
npmremark-cli^12.0.0direct
npmremark-lint^10.0.0direct
npmremark-preset-lint-recommended^7.0.0direct
Mavenio.jenkins.tools.incrementals:incrementals-maven-plugin1.13indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-enforcer-plugin1.13indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-jar-plugin—indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin—indirect
Mavenorg.assertj:assertj-assertions-generator-maven-plugin—indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.mojo:build-helper-maven-plugin3.6.2indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.mojo:flatten-maven-plugin1.8.0indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.mojo:versions-maven-plugin2.23.0indirect
Mavenorg.openjdk.jmh:jmh-core1.37indirect
Mavenorg.openjdk.jmh:jmh-generator-annprocess1.37indirect
Mavenorg.openjdk.jmh:maven-compiler-plugin—indirect
Mavenorg.pitest:pitest-maven—indirect
Mavenorg.revapi:revapi-maven-plugin—indirect
Mavenorg.slf4j:jul-to-slf4j2.0.20indirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: OSV advisory lookup failed: [Errno 101] Network is unreachable

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 — Maven, npm.