Public record
Software health reportschema 0.29.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-02 19:01 UTC

line / line-bot-sdk-python

LINE Messaging API SDK for Python

PythonApache-2.0★ 2,126 stars⑂ 1,050 forkssince Oct 2016View on GitHub ↗

line/line-bot-sdk-python holds a health index of 95 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (99/100) and lowest on Security (46/100). It was last updated 5 days ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

95
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

95
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 82 is calibrated to 95 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

LINEOrganization
1,476 followers162 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
PyPIline-bot-sdk3.25.0-7826 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

99Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 5 days ago
33.9/36Commit cadence49/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume195 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintainedno data
Inputs used
commits_last_year195
human_commit_share0.05
days_since_last_push5
active_weeks_last_year49

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases78 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 26 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~35 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count78
latest_release_tagv3.25.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release26
mean_days_between_releases35

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

88Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
54/60Stars2,126 stars
25/25Forks1,050 forks
11.2/15Watchers104 watchers
Inputs used
forks1,050
stars2,126
watchers104
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

86Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
17/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 24% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth51 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsno data
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled51
top_contributor_share0.245
How it's scored
41.5/42Issue resolution99% of issues closed
26.8/30PR acceptance692/775 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance0/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewno data
Inputs used
merged_prs692
open_issues3
closed_issues259
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio0.989
closed_unmerged_prs83
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
22.8/25Owner reach1,476 followers of line
25/25Track record162 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,476
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginline
public_repos162
account_age_days4,050
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 26 days ago
20/20Version history78 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesline-bot-sdk
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish26

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

88Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows7 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configtox.ini
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://pypi.python.org/pypi/line-bot-sdk
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsline, bot, sdk, python, linebot
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://pypi.python.org/pypi/line-bot-sdk
docs_sitehttps://pypi.python.org/pypi/line-bot-sdk
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

46Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
25/25Dependabot config
0/25Dependency lockfilespublished library — lockfiles are an application concern, not expected
0/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfiles
manifestsgenerator/pom.xml, requirements-dev.txt, requirements-test.txt, requirements.txt, setup.cfg, setup.py
has_codeql_workflowno
has_security_policyno
has_dependabot_configyes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dependency lockfiles. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages24
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:line-bot-sdk@3.25.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 24 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.

50Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno 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.
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapdocs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configtox.ini
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance90 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesdocs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsgenerator/pom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.9
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
54.1/55Manageable file sizes9/571 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes488,585
source_files_sampled571
oversized_source_files9
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

2,126GitHub stars
51contributors
195commits, last 12 months
5days since last push
78releases
3bus factor
3open issues
Maven, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch maven package 'org.openapitools:python-nextgen-custom-client-openapi-generator' from its registry
  • OpenSSF Scorecard timed out after 240s; skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 1,050 ⇿
0Stars
1,050Forks
75Releases

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.

Only the most recent history is shown — this repository exceeds the collection window, so the earliest history is not captured.

02004006008001,0001,2001,050462016-122021-102026-07
Major 1Minor 45Patch 29

Each point covers 9 days.

Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Mavenorg.openapitools:openapi-generator-cli${openapi-generator-version}generator/pom.xml
Mavenio.pebbletemplates:pebble4.1.2generator/pom.xml
All dependencies 38

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 36 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavenio.pebbletemplates:pebble4.1.2direct
Mavenorg.openapitools:openapi-generator-cli7.24.0direct
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin3.15.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-enforcer-plugin3.6.3indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-jar-plugin3.5.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-shade-plugin3.6.2indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin3.5.6indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.mojo:build-helper-maven-plugin3.6.1indirect
Mavenorg.junit.jupiter:junit-jupiter-api6.1.2indirect
Mavenorg.junit.jupiter:junit-jupiter-engine6.1.2indirect
Mavenorg.openapitools:openapi-generator7.24.0indirect
PyPIaenumindirect
PyPIaiodnsindirect
PyPIaiohttpindirect
PyPIblack26.5.1indirect
PyPIdeprecatedindirect
PyPIfastapiindirect
PyPIflaskindirect
PyPIfutureindirect
PyPIline-bot-sdkindirect
PyPIpydanticindirect
PyPIpypandoc1.17indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-aiohttp1.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio1.4.0indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpytest-httpserverindirect
PyPIpython-dateutilindirect
PyPIrequestsindirect
PyPIresponses0.26.2indirect
PyPIsphinx9.0.4indirect
PyPIsphinx-rtd-theme3.1.0indirect
PyPItox4.58.0indirect
PyPItwine6.2.0indirect
PyPIurllib3indirect
PyPIuvicornindirect
PyPIwerkzeugindirect
PyPIwheel0.47.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:line-bot-sdk@3.25.0 pulls in 24 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.

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 v0.29.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsPyPI.