Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-15 15:47 UTC

karafka / waterdrop

Standalone Karafka library for producing Kafka messages

RubyCustom license★ 286 stars⑂ 40 forkssince Jul 2015View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined
#waterdrop#ruby-kafka#karafka-framework#karafka#karafka-application#kafka#apache-kafka#rubygems#rubygem#ruby#apache-kafka-producer

karafka/waterdrop holds a health index of 88 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (99/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (41/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

88
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.

88
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 74 is calibrated to 88 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

KarafkaOrganization
38 followers18 public repossince Jul 2015

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemswaterdrop2.10.3-1250 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

99Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

99Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
34.6/36Commit cadence — 50/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 279 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year279
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year50

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 82 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~30.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count82
latest_release_tagv2.10.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases30.9
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?

63Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

58Moderate
How it's scored
39.8/60Stars — 286 stars
13.3/25Forks — 40 forks
4.7/15Watchers — 8 watchers
Inputs used
forks40
stars286
watchers8
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

44Weak
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_badges—
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

97Exceptional
How it's scored
77.8/80Total downloads — 30,387,640 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageswaterdrop
dependents—
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads30,387,640
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?

71Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

38Weak
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
5.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 76% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 19 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 7 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled19
top_contributor_share0.755

Issue & PR responsiveness

79Good
How it's scored
40.1/42Issue resolution — 96% of issues closed
29/30PR acceptance — 711/735 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs711
open_issues8
closed_issues171
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.955
closed_unmerged_prs24
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

78Good
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
11.4/25Owner reach — 38 followers of karafka
21.3/25Track record — 18 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers38
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified—
owner_loginkarafka
public_repos18
account_age_days4,020
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 rubygems
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 125 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageswaterdrop
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

84Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 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

65Good
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://karafka.io
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 11 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicswaterdrop, ruby-kafka, karafka-framework, karafka, karafka-application, kafka, apache-kafka, rubygems, rubygem, ruby, apache-kafka-producer
has_wikino
homepagehttps://karafka.io
docs_sitehttps://karafka.io
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

61Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

61Moderate
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 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 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 7 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
2.2/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
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_aggregate6.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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.

41Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

65Good
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
0/8Automated maintenance — no data
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock, package-lock.json
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Ruby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/138 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes36,676
source_files_sampled138
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

286GitHub stars
19contributors
279commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
82releases
1bus factor
8open issues
npm, RubyGemspackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.1 / 10
6.1aggregate

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 · 2026-07-15 15:46 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
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 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 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 7 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
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 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemszeitwerk~> 2.8.0Gemfile
All dependencies 57

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 53 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemszeitwerk—direct
RubyGemszeitwerk2.7.4direct
RubyGemszeitwerk2.7.5direct
RubyGemszeitwerk2.8.2direct
npm@nodelib/fs.scandir2.1.5indirect
npm@nodelib/fs.stat2.0.5indirect
npm@nodelib/fs.walk1.2.8indirect
npmbraces3.0.3indirect
npmchalk5.6.2indirect
npmcommander12.1.0indirect
npmfast-glob3.3.3indirect
npmfastq1.20.1indirect
npmfill-range7.1.1indirect
npmglob-parent5.1.2indirect
npmis-extglob2.1.1indirect
npmis-glob4.0.3indirect
npmis-number7.0.0indirect
npmlostconf0.4.0indirect
npmmerge21.4.1indirect
npmmicromatch4.0.8indirect
npmpicomatch2.3.2indirect
npmqueue-microtask1.2.3indirect
npmreusify1.1.0indirect
npmrun-parallel1.2.0indirect
npmsmol-toml1.7.0indirect
npmto-regex-range5.0.1indirect
npmyaml2.9.0indirect
RubyGemsasync—indirect
RubyGemsbyebug13.0.0indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool—indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool3.0.2indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.3indirect
RubyGemsffi1.17.3indirect
RubyGemsffi1.17.4indirect
RubyGemsio-console0.8.2indirect
RubyGemsjson2.18.0indirect
RubyGemsjson2.18.1indirect
RubyGemsjson2.20.0indirect
RubyGemskarafka-core—indirect
RubyGemskarafka-core2.5.8indirect
RubyGemskarafka-core2.6.2indirect
RubyGemskarafka-rdkafka—indirect
RubyGemskarafka-rdkafka0.23.1indirect
RubyGemskarafka-rdkafka0.24.0.rc3indirect
RubyGemskarafka-rdkafka0.27.2indirect
RubyGemslogger1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsmini_portile22.8.9indirect
RubyGemsminitest6.0.6indirect
RubyGemsmocha3.1.0indirect
RubyGemsostruct0.6.3indirect
RubyGemsprism1.9.0indirect
RubyGemsrake13.3.1indirect
RubyGemsrake13.4.2indirect
RubyGemsreline0.6.3indirect
RubyGemsruby2_keywords0.0.5indirect
RubyGemssimplecov1.0.0indirect
RubyGemswarning1.6.0indirect
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 karafka/waterdrop. Read them side by side →

94karafka/karafkaRuby and Rails efficient Kafka processing frameworkExceptional91karafka/rdkafka-rubyModern and performant Kafka client library for Ruby based on librdkafkaExcellent87oxidize-rb/rb-sysEasily build Ruby native extensions in RustExcellent99ruby/rubygemsLibrary packaging and distribution for Ruby.Exceptional94redpanda-data/consoleRedpanda Console is a developer-friendly UI for managing your Kafka/Redpanda workloads. Console gives you a simple, interactive approach for gaining visibility into your topics, masking data, managing consumer groups, and exploring real-time data with time-travel debugging.Exceptional90thoughtbot/factory_botA library for setting up Ruby objects as test data.Excellent

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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — RubyGems.