Software health reportschema 0.27.0 · metrics 2.5.0 · 2026-07-31 16:50 UTC

kirillzyusko / react-native-teleport

A missing native portal implementation for react-native 🛸

TypeScript · KotlinMIT★ 776 stars⑂ 17 forkssince Aug 2025View on GitHub ↗

kirillzyusko/react-native-teleport holds a health index of 87 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (90/100) and lowest on Security (44/100). It was last updated 9 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

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.

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)

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 73 is calibrated to 87 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Kirill ZyuskoPersonal account

450 followers40 public repossince Oct 2016

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish	Tags
npm	react-native-teleport	1.1.12	288,732	27	9 days ago	react-native portal teleport tunnel re-parent reparent reparentable gateway ios android web
npm	e2e	0.1.0	1,522	8	9 days ago	e2e tester-army

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

89Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

81Excellent

How it's scored

28.8/36	Push recency — last push 9 days ago
24.2/36	Commit cadence — 35/52 weeks with commits
18/18	Commit volume — 126 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 8 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	126
human_commit_share	1
days_since_last_push	9
active_weeks_last_year	35

Release discipline

100Exceptional

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 27 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 9 days ago
27/27	Release cadence — a release every ~10.3 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	27
latest_release_tag	1.1.12
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	9
mean_days_between_releases	10.3

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?

79Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

60Moderate

How it's scored

46.9/60	Stars — 776 stars
10/25	Forks — 17 forks
2.7/15	Watchers — 4 watchers

Inputs used

forks	17
stars	776
watchers	4
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

92Excellent

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
6.3/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	—
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	yes
readme_badge_services	—
has_pull_request_template	yes

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

91Excellent

How it's scored

72.8/80	Monthly downloads — 290,254 downloads/month across npm
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	react-native-teleport, e2e
dependents	—
ecosystems	npm
total_downloads	—
monthly_downloads	290,254

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?

63Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

25At Risk

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2.5/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 89% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 11 contributors
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	11
top_contributor_share	0.888

Issue & PR responsiveness

77Good

How it's scored

39.8/42	Issue resolution — 95% of issues closed
27.6/30	PR acceptance — 125/136 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 2/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

merged_prs	125
open_issues	1
closed_issues	18
prs_merged_7d	—
prs_decided_7d	—
prs_merged_30d	—
prs_decided_30d	—
issue_closed_ratio	0.947
closed_unmerged_prs	11
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

66Good

How it's scored

10/30	Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20	Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
19.1/25	Owner reach — 450 followers of kirillzyusko
23.7/25	Track record — 40 public repos, account ~9 yr old

Inputs used

followers	450
owner_type	User
is_verified	—
owner_login	kirillzyusko
public_repos	40
account_age_days	3,578

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 2 package(s) on npm
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 9 days ago
20/20	Version history — 27 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	react-native-teleport, e2e
ecosystems	npm
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	9

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

90Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

90Excellent

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 17 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — eslint.config.mjs
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4	.editorconfig
20/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	yes
has_linter_config	yes
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

90Excellent

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://kirillzyusko.github.io/react-native-teleport/
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 3 topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	portal, react-native, reparenting
has_wiki	no
homepage	https://kirillzyusko.github.io/react-native-teleport/
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	yes
has_description	yes

Security

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

44Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

44Weak

How it's scored

6.8/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — binaries present in source code
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5	CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5	Code-Review — Found 2/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5	Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 8 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5	Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5	Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 114 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	16
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	2
scorecard_aggregate	4.4

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): branch_protection, 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.

62Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40	Legible commit history — 100 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
legible_history_share	1
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

73Good

How it's scored

12.6/18	One-command bootstrap — android/build.gradle, example/android/app/build.gradle, example/android/build.gradle (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — eslint.config.mjs
11/11	Static type checking — docs/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
10/10	Reproducible environment — lockfile
6/10	Demonstrated agent practice — 3 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8	Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	Gemfile.lock, package-lock.json, yarn.lock
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	—
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	docs/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share	0.03
toolchain_manifests	android/build.gradle, example/android/app/build.gradle, example/android/build.gradle
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Code legibility for models

99Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
54.2/55	Manageable file sizes — 2/139 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	TypeScript
largest_source_bytes	2,228,925
source_files_sampled	139
oversized_source_files	2

Machine-readable interfaces

40Weak

How it's scored

0/40	API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
0/20	MCP server
40/40	Runnable examples — example, recipes

Inputs used

example_dirs	example, recipes
has_mcp_signal	no
api_schema_files	—

Key facts

776GitHub stars

11contributors

126commits, last 12 months

9days since last push

27releases

1bus factor

1open issues

Maven, npm, RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 17 ⇿

0Stars

17Forks

21Releases

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.

Major 1Minor 2Patch 18

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.4 / 10

4.4aggregate

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 · 2026-07-31 16:50 UTC

9	Binary-Artifacts	binaries present in source code
n/a	Branch-Protection	internal 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
10	CI-Tests	30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0	Code-Review	Found 2/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0	Contributors	project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0	Dependency-Update-Tool	no update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	30 commit(s) and 8 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10	Packaging	packaging workflow detected
0	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10	Security-Policy	security policy file detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0	Vulnerabilities	114 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 2

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
npm	pngjs	`7.0.0`	e2e/package.json
npm	pixelmatch	`7.1.0`	e2e/package.json

All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

Raw JSON report machine-readable

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 v2.5.0, schema v0.27.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Related records