Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-21 15:23 UTC

lightwebinc / shard-common

Common elements for BSV Layered Multicast sharded data transmission services.

GoApache-2.0★ 1 star⑂ 0 forkssince Apr 2026View on GitHub ↗

lightwebinc/shard-common 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 (24/100). It was last updated 2 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

Lightweb Inc.Organization
13 followers34 public repossince May 2026

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Gogithub.com/lightwebinc/shard-commonv0.22.0-4827 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 2 days ago
17.3/36Commit cadence — 25/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 144 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_year144
human_commit_share0.91
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year25

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 41 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 27 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~8.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count41
latest_release_tagv0.22.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release27
mean_days_between_releases8.6
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
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 1 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars1
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, pkg.go.dev, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

45Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 99% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.993
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — 0% of issues closed
20/30PR acceptance — 10/15 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs10
open_issues1
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0
closed_unmerged_prs5
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
8.2/25Owner reach — 13 followers of lightwebinc
12.1/25Track record — 34 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers13
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginlightwebinc
public_repos34
account_age_days148

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 27 days ago
20/20Version history — 48 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/lightwebinc/shard-common
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish27

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

84Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .golangci.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 7 out of 7 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

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsbitcoin-sv, bsv, golang, library, multicast
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?

63Moderate · 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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 7 out of 7 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 0/24 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
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 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
6.8/7.5Token-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_aggregate5.4
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
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
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages38
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
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 38 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

58Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
5.3/40Legible commit history — 9 of 91 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.099
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .golangci.yml
11/11Static type checking — Go (statically 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
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/92 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes29,791
source_files_sampled92
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

1GitHub stars
2contributors
144commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
41releases
1bus factor
1open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.4 / 10
5.4aggregate

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 · 2026-10-21 15:23 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests7 out of 7 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 0/24 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
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 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
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 10
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/aerospike/aerospike-client-go/v8v8.7.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/alicebob/miniredis/v2v2.38.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/cespare/xxhash/v2v2.3.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/redis/go-redis/v9v9.19.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/shirou/gopsutil/v4v4.26.5go.mod
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otelv1.45.0go.mod
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/exporters/otlp/otlptrace/otlptracegrpcv1.45.0go.mod
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/sdkv1.45.0go.mod
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/tracev1.45.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.48.0go.mod
All dependencies 38

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 10 direct and 28 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/aerospike/aerospike-client-go/v8v8.7.0direct
Gogithub.com/alicebob/miniredis/v2v2.38.0direct
Gogithub.com/cespare/xxhash/v2v2.3.0direct
Gogithub.com/redis/go-redis/v9v9.19.0direct
Gogithub.com/shirou/gopsutil/v4v4.26.5direct
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otelv1.45.0direct
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/exporters/otlp/otlptrace/otlptracegrpcv1.45.0direct
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/sdkv1.45.0direct
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/tracev1.45.0direct
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.48.0direct
Gogithub.com/cenkalti/backoff/v5v5.0.3indirect
Gogithub.com/ebitengine/puregov0.10.0indirect
Gogithub.com/go-logr/logrv1.4.4indirect
Gogithub.com/go-logr/stdrv1.2.2indirect
Gogithub.com/go-ole/go-olev1.2.6indirect
Gogithub.com/google/uuidv1.6.0indirect
Gogithub.com/grpc-ecosystem/grpc-gateway/v2v2.29.0indirect
Gogithub.com/lufia/plan9statsv0.0.0-20211012122336-39d0f177ccd0indirect
Gogithub.com/power-devops/perfstatv0.0.0-20240221224432-82ca36839d55indirect
Gogithub.com/tklauser/go-sysconfv0.3.16indirect
Gogithub.com/tklauser/numcpusv0.11.0indirect
Gogithub.com/wadey/gocovmergev0.0.0-20160331181800-b5bfa59ec0adindirect
Gogithub.com/yuin/gopher-luav1.1.2indirect
Gogithub.com/yusufpapurcu/wmiv1.2.4indirect
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/auto/sdkv1.2.1indirect
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/exporters/otlp/otlptracev1.45.0indirect
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/metricv1.45.0indirect
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/proto/otlpv1.11.0indirect
Gogo.uber.org/atomicv1.11.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.60.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/syncv0.23.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/textv0.42.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/toolsv0.49.0indirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/apiv0.0.0-20260803160001-6ac0973c030dindirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/rpcv0.0.0-20260803160001-6ac0973c030dindirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/grpcv1.83.2indirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.11indirect
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 38 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

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 — Go.