Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-21 20:26 UTC

larsyencken / alcove

A personal ETL and data lake.

PythonMIT★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Jul 2024View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

larsyencken/alcove holds a health index of 45 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (65/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (24/100). It was last updated 56 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

45
overall / 100
Weak

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.

45
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 47 is calibrated to 45 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Lars YenckenPersonal account
143 followers81 public repossince Nov 2008FAR AI

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 publishTags
PyPIalcove0.3.0346168 days agocontent-addressabledata-engineeringdata-lakeetl

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

42Weak · 21% of overall

Development activity

32At Risk
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 56 days ago
4.2/36Commit cadence — 6/52 weeks with commits
9.7/18Commit volume — 11 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year11
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push56
active_weeks_last_year6

Release discipline

58Moderate
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 4 version tags (no GitHub releases)
16.2/36Release recency — latest release 194 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~96.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count4
latest_release_tagv0.2.2
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release194
mean_days_between_releases96.4
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?

24At Risk · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

1Critical
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 0 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

26At Risk
How it's scored
20.6/80Monthly downloads — 34 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesalcove
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads34
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

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

13Critical
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1

Issue & PR responsiveness

72Good
How it's scored
36.6/42Issue resolution — 87% of issues closed
26.2/30PR acceptance — 28/32 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs28
open_issues4
closed_issues27
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.871
closed_unmerged_prs4
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.

Ownership & stewardship

63Moderate
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
15.5/25Owner reach — 143 followers of larsyencken
25/25Track record — 81 public repos, account ~17 yr old
Inputs used
followers143
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginlarsyencken
public_repos81
account_age_days6,481
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 168 days ago
20/20Version history — 6 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesalcove
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish168

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

65Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

58Moderate
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
10/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 1 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

75Good
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
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?

39Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

24At Risk
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
1.2/2.5CI-Tests — 1 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/23 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
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — 1 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
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 24 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate2.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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_packages23
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:alcove@0.3.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 23 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.

61Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

65Good
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
19.7/40Legible commit history — 37 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.37
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes914

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

60Moderate
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 19 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
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_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.19
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/19 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes22,217
source_files_sampled19
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

0GitHub stars
1contributors
11commits, last 12 months
56days since last push
4releases
1bus factor
4open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 2.4 / 10
2.4aggregate

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 · 2026-08-21 20:26 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
5CI-Tests1 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/23 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
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained1 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
0Vulnerabilities24 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 9
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIboto3>=1.34.145pyproject.toml
PyPIpyyaml>=6.0.1pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-dotenv>=1.0.1pyproject.toml
PyPIjsonschema>=4.23.0pyproject.toml
PyPIruff>=0.5.5pyproject.toml
PyPIrich>=13.7.1pyproject.toml
PyPIpolars>=1.4.0pyproject.toml
PyPIduckdb>=1.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpyarrow>=23.0.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 67

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 9 direct and 58 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIboto31.35.54direct
PyPIduckdb1.1.2direct
PyPIjsonschema4.23.0direct
PyPIpolars1.12.0direct
PyPIpyarrow23.0.0direct
PyPIpython-dotenv1.0.1direct
PyPIpyyaml6.0.2direct
PyPIrich13.9.4direct
PyPIruff0.7.2direct
PyPIargon2-cffi23.1.0indirect
PyPIargon2-cffi-bindings21.2.0indirect
PyPIattrs24.2.0indirect
PyPIbotocore1.35.54indirect
PyPIcertifi2024.8.30indirect
PyPIcffi1.17.1indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.1indirect
PyPIclick8.3.1indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcryptography44.0.2indirect
PyPIdeepmerge2.0indirect
PyPIdocker7.1.0indirect
PyPIdocutils0.21.2indirect
PyPIhatchling1.27.0indirect
PyPIid1.5.0indirect
PyPIidna3.10indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.0.0indirect
PyPIjaraco-classes3.4.0indirect
PyPIjaraco-context6.0.1indirect
PyPIjaraco-functools4.1.0indirect
PyPIjeepney0.9.0indirect
PyPIjmespath1.0.1indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2024.10.1indirect
PyPIkeyring25.6.0indirect
PyPImarkdown3.10.2indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py3.0.0indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPIminio7.2.10indirect
PyPImore-itertools10.7.0indirect
PyPInh30.2.21indirect
PyPInodeenv1.9.1indirect
PyPIpackaging25.0indirect
PyPIpathspec0.12.1indirect
PyPIpluggy1.5.0indirect
PyPIpycparser2.22indirect
PyPIpycryptodome3.21.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.18.0indirect
PyPIpymdown-extensions10.21indirect
PyPIpyright1.1.387indirect
PyPIpytest8.3.3indirect
PyPIpytest-docker3.2.1indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpywin32310indirect
PyPIpywin32-ctypes0.2.3indirect
PyPIreadme-renderer44.0indirect
PyPIreferencing0.35.1indirect
PyPIrequests2.32.3indirect
PyPIrequests-toolbelt1.0.0indirect
PyPIrfc39862.0.0indirect
PyPIrpds-py0.20.1indirect
PyPIs3transfer0.10.3indirect
PyPIsecretstorage3.3.3indirect
PyPIsix1.16.0indirect
PyPItrove-classifiers2025.4.11.15indirect
PyPItwine6.1.0indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.12.2indirect
PyPIurllib32.2.3indirect
PyPIzensical0.0.23indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:alcove@0.3.0 pulls in 23 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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with larsyencken/alcove. Read them side by side →

96dlt-hub/dltdata load tool (dlt) is an open source Python library that makes data loading easy 🛠️ Exceptional69PFund-Software-Ltd/pfeedData Engine for AI/Algo Trading: Download/Stream -> Clean -> Store. Supports Data Lakehouse Architecture. Clean Once and Forget.Good67realdatadriven/etlxETL / ELT / Reverse ETL Framework powered by DuckDB, designed to seamlessly integrate and process data from diverse sources. It leverages Markdown as a configuration medium, where YAML blocks define metadata for each data source, and embedded SQL blocks specify the extraction, transformation, and loading logic.Good100apache/airflowApache Airflow - A platform to programmatically author, schedule, and monitor workflowsExceptional98Eventual-Inc/DaftHigh-performance data engine for AI and multimodal workloads. Process images, audio, video, and structured data at any scaleExceptional98dagster-io/dagsterAn orchestration platform for the development, production, and observation of data assets.Exceptional

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.