Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-20 07:58 UTC

jrothbaum / polars_readstat

Polars IO plugin to read SAS (sas7bdat), Stata (dta), and SPSS (sav) files

Rust · PythonCustom license★ 44 stars⑂ 7 forkssince Apr 2025View on GitHub ↗

jrothbaum/polars_readstat holds a health index of 67 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (89/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (44/100). It was last updated 6 days ago. A single contributor accounts 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

Jon RothbaumPersonal account
13 followers10 public repossince Apr 2011U.S. Census Bureau

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 publish
PyPIpolars-readstat0.25.05,036485 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

89Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 6 days ago
24.2/36Commit cadence — 35/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 256 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 8 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year256
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push6
active_weeks_last_year35
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 55 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 6 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~13.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count55
latest_release_tagv0.25.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release6
mean_days_between_releases13.6

Community & Adoption

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

44Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
26.5/60Stars — 44 stars
6.5/25Forks — 7 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks7
stars44
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5License — license file present, not a recognized license
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
49.4/80Monthly downloads — 5,036 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagespolars-readstat
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads5,036
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 factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 80% of commits
10.8/13.5Contributor breadth — 8 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled8
top_contributor_share0.802
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
21.4/30PR acceptance — 5/7 decided PRs merged
8.7/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 2/3 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 2/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs5
open_issues0
closed_issues64
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d3
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs2
first_time_authors_30d3
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d3
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
8.2/25Owner reach — 13 followers of jrothbaum
19.6/25Track record — 10 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers13
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginjrothbaum
public_repos10
account_age_days5,669
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 5 days ago
20/20Version history — 48 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespolars-readstat
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish5

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

59Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspolars, sas, stata, spss
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

45Weak · 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
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 2/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 8 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
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 — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 10 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate3.1

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_packages2
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:polars-readstat@0.25.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 2 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.

67Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — crates/polars_readstat_rs/claude.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
4.3/40Legible commit history — 8 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.08
agent_instruction_filescrates/polars_readstat_rs/claude.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes8,045
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — Cargo.toml, crates/polars_readstat_bindings/Cargo.toml, crates/polars_readstat_rs/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — polars_readstat/polars_readstat/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
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
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configspolars_readstat/polars_readstat/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, crates/polars_readstat_bindings/Cargo.toml, crates/polars_readstat_rs/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
53.2/55Manageable file sizes — 8/238 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes677,463
source_files_sampled238
oversized_source_files8
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

44GitHub stars
8contributors
256commits, last 12 months
6days since last push
55releases
1bus factor
0open issues
crates.io, 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 ★ / 7 ⇿
0Stars
7Forks
52Releases

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.

1234567712025-042026-012026-10
Major 0Minor 15Patch 34

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.1 / 10
3.1aggregate

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 · 2026-10-20 07:58 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 2/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 8 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow 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
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities10 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIpolars>=1.28.1pyproject.toml
All dependencies 85

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 83 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIpolars1.36.1direct
PyPIpolars1.44.1direct
crates.iobyteorder—indirect
crates.iochrono—indirect
crates.iocriterion—indirect
crates.ioencoding_rs—indirect
crates.ioflate2—indirect
crates.ioglob—indirect
crates.iolog—indirect
crates.ionum_cpus—indirect
crates.ioobject_store—indirect
crates.iopath_abs—indirect
crates.iopolars—indirect
crates.iopolars-arrow—indirect
crates.iopolars-core—indirect
crates.iopyo3—indirect
crates.iopyo3-polars—indirect
crates.iorayon—indirect
crates.ioserde_json—indirect
crates.iothiserror—indirect
crates.iotokio—indirect
crates.iourl—indirect
PyPIbabel2.18.0indirect
PyPIbackrefs6.2indirect
PyPIbackrefs8.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.7.22indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.5.1indirect
PyPIclick8.1.8indirect
PyPIclick8.5.0indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIghp-import2.1.0indirect
PyPIidna3.19indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata8.7.1indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.1.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPImarkdown3.10.3indirect
PyPImarkdown3.9indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImaturin1.15.0indirect
PyPImergedeep1.3.4indirect
PyPImkdocs1.6.1indirect
PyPImkdocs-get-deps0.2.2indirect
PyPImkdocs-material9.7.7indirect
PyPImkdocs-material-extensions1.3.1indirect
PyPInarwhals2.21.0indirect
PyPInarwhals2.25.0indirect
PyPInumpy2.0.2indirect
PyPInumpy2.2.6indirect
PyPInumpy2.4.6indirect
PyPInumpy2.5.2indirect
PyPIpackaging26.3indirect
PyPIpaginate0.5.7indirect
PyPIpandas2.3.3indirect
PyPIpandas3.0.5indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.11.7indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.4.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpolars-readstat0.25.0indirect
PyPIpolars-runtime-321.36.1indirect
PyPIpolars-runtime-321.44.1indirect
PyPIpyarrow21.0.0indirect
PyPIpyarrow25.0.1indirect
PyPIpygments2.21.0indirect
PyPIpymdown-extensions10.21.3indirect
PyPIpymdown-extensions11.0.2indirect
PyPIpyreadstat1.3.6indirect
PyPIpytest8.4.2indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpytz2026.3.post1indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIpyyaml-env-tag1.1indirect
PyPIrequests2.32.5indirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPItzdata2026.3indirect
PyPIurllib32.6.3indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIwatchdog6.0.0indirect
PyPIzipp3.23.1indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:polars-readstat@0.25.0 pulls in 2 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.