Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-19 01:41 UTC

lightbasenl / platforms

Packages & reusable workflows for Lightbase platforms

TypeScriptMIT★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Feb 2024View on GitHub ↗

lightbasenl/platforms holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (92/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (34/100). It was last updated 8 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

78
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.

78
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 67 is calibrated to 78 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

LightbaseOrganization · verified domain
6 followers6 public repossince Oct 2018

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
npm@lightbase/utils1.4.12,0637170 days ago
npm@lightbase/eslint-config4.4.02,4714629 days ago
npm@lightbase/pull-through-cache0.4.21,74810137 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

92Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 8 days ago
29.1/36Commit cadence — 42/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 293 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year293
human_commit_share0.08
days_since_last_push8
active_weeks_last_year42

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 67 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 29 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~20.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count67
latest_release_tageslint-config-v4.4.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release29
mean_days_between_releases20.1
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?

34At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 0 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
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_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
50.6/80Monthly downloads — 6,282 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@lightbase/utils, @lightbase/eslint-config, @lightbase/pull-through-cache
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads6,282
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
0.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 98% of commits
6.8/13.5Contributor breadth — 5 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled5
top_contributor_share0.98
How it's scored
10.5/42Issue resolution — 25% of issues closed
25.5/30PR acceptance — 817/961 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
9/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 3/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
merged_prs817
open_issues6
closed_issues2
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.25
closed_unmerged_prs144
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.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
6.1/25Owner reach — 6 followers of lightbasenl
18.2/25Track record — 6 public repos, account ~7 yr old
Inputs used
followers6
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginlightbasenl
public_repos6
account_age_days2,883

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 3 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 29 days ago
20/20Version history — 46 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@lightbase/utils, @lightbase/eslint-config, @lightbase/pull-through-cache
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish29

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 7 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — eslint.config.js
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 28 out of 28 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
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
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?

70Good · 16% of overall
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 — 28 out of 28 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
4.5/7.5Code-Review — Found 3/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no 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 0 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 — 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_aggregate6.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories1
affected_packages1
assessed_packages41
unassessed_packages1
affected_by_severitymoderate 1
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 41 resolved dependencies against OSV. 1 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. 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.

69Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
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_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes3,245
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — eslint.config.js
11/11Static type checking — packages/doc-tool/tsconfig.json, packages/eslint-config/tsconfig.json, packages/pull-through-cache/tsconfig.json, packages/utils/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 92 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configspackages/doc-tool/tsconfig.json, packages/eslint-config/tsconfig.json, packages/pull-through-cache/tsconfig.json, packages/utils/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.92
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/71 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes13,662
source_files_sampled71
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

0GitHub stars
5contributors
293commits, last 12 months
8days since last push
67releases
1bus factor
6open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Could not fetch npm package '@lightbase/doc-tool' from its registry

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.2 / 10
6.2aggregate

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 · 2026-09-19 01:41 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-Tests28 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6Code-ReviewFound 3/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 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
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 26
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@lightbase/utils1.0.3packages/doc-tool/package.json
npm@standard-schema/spec1.1.0packages/doc-tool/package.json
npmconsola3.4.2packages/doc-tool/package.json
npmmdast-util-from-markdown2.0.3packages/doc-tool/package.json
npmmdast-util-frontmatter2.0.1packages/doc-tool/package.json
npmmdast-util-gfm3.1.0packages/doc-tool/package.json
npmmicromark-extension-frontmatter2.0.0packages/doc-tool/package.json
npmmicromark-extension-gfm3.0.0packages/doc-tool/package.json
npmyaml2.9.0packages/doc-tool/package.json
npm@eslint/js9.39.4packages/eslint-config/package.json
npm@typescript-eslint/parser8.65.0packages/eslint-config/package.json
npm@typescript-eslint/utils8.65.0packages/eslint-config/package.json
npmdiff-match-patch1.0.5packages/eslint-config/package.json
npmeslint9.39.4packages/eslint-config/package.json
npmeslint-config-flat-gitignore2.3.0packages/eslint-config/package.json
npmeslint-import-resolver-typescript4.4.5packages/eslint-config/package.json
npmeslint-mdx3.8.1packages/eslint-config/package.json
npmeslint-plugin-comment-length2.3.1packages/eslint-config/package.json
npmeslint-plugin-file-progress3.0.2packages/eslint-config/package.json
npmeslint-plugin-import-x4.17.1packages/eslint-config/package.json
npmeslint-plugin-jsdoc63.3.1packages/eslint-config/package.json
npmeslint-plugin-mdx3.8.1packages/eslint-config/package.json
npmglobals17.8.0packages/eslint-config/package.json
npmprettier3.8.4packages/eslint-config/package.json
npmsynckit0.11.13packages/eslint-config/package.json
npmtypescript-eslint8.65.0packages/eslint-config/package.json
All dependencies 42

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 26 direct and 16 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@eslint/js9.39.4direct
npm@lightbase/utils1.0.3direct
npm@standard-schema/spec1.1.0direct
npm@typescript-eslint/parser8.65.0direct
npm@typescript-eslint/utils8.65.0direct
npmconsola3.4.2direct
npmdiff-match-patch1.0.5direct
npmeslint9.39.4direct
npmeslint-config-flat-gitignore2.3.0direct
npmeslint-import-resolver-typescript4.4.5direct
npmeslint-mdx3.8.1direct
npmeslint-plugin-comment-length2.3.1direct
npmeslint-plugin-file-progress3.0.2direct
npmeslint-plugin-import-x4.17.1direct
npmeslint-plugin-jsdoc63.3.1direct
npmeslint-plugin-mdx3.8.1direct
npmglobals17.8.0direct
npmmdast-util-from-markdown2.0.3direct
npmmdast-util-frontmatter2.0.1direct
npmmdast-util-gfm3.1.0direct
npmmicromark-extension-frontmatter2.0.0direct
npmmicromark-extension-gfm3.0.0direct
npmprettier3.8.4direct
npmsynckit0.11.13direct
npmtypescript-eslint8.65.0direct
npmyaml2.9.0direct
npm@lightbase/eslint-config*indirect
npm@next/eslint-plugin-next16.2.11indirect
npm@total-typescript/tsconfig1.0.4indirect
npm@types/diff-match-patch1.0.36indirect
npm@types/eslint9.6.1indirect
npm@types/node26.1.2indirect
npm@vitest/coverage-v84.1.10indirect
npmeslint-formatter-compact9.0.1indirect
npmeslint-plugin-jsx-a11y6.10.2indirect
npmeslint-plugin-no-relative-import-paths1.6.1indirect
npmeslint-plugin-react7.37.5indirect
npmeslint-plugin-react-hooks7.1.1indirect
npmpatch-package8.0.1indirect
npmtsx4.23.1indirect
npmtypescript6.0.3indirect
npmvitest4.1.10indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 41 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 1 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
vitest4.1.10indirectmoderate15.0.0-rc.2

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 — npm.