Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 13:55 UTC

macieklamberski / feedsmith

Fast, all‑in‑one JavaScript feed parser and generator for RSS, Atom, RDF, and JSON Feed, with support for popular namespaces and OPML.

TypeScriptMIT★ 607 stars⑂ 21 forkssince Mar 2025View on GitHub ↗

macieklamberski/feedsmith holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (96/100) and lowest on Security (41/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

80
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.

80
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Maciek LamberskiPersonal account
32 followers26 public repossince Dec 2009

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

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

96Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 2 days ago
29.8/36Commit cadence43/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume556 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained27 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year556
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year43

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases53 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 2 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~10.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count53
latest_release_tagv3.0.0-rc.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release2
mean_days_between_releases10.2
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?

61Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
45.1/60Stars607 stars
10.8/25Forks21 forks
0/15Watchers1 watchers
Inputs used
forks21
stars607
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
68.5/80Monthly downloads137,955 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesfeedsmith
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads137,955
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?

54Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 97% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth2 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.974
How it's scored
38.8/42Issue resolution92% of issues closed
19.8/30PR acceptance183/277 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs183
open_issues3
closed_issues36
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.923
closed_unmerged_prs94
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.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
10.9/25Owner reach32 followers of macieklamberski
22.4/25Track record26 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers32
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginmacieklamberski
public_repos26
account_age_days6,060
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 npm
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 2 days ago
20/20Version history53 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesfeedsmith
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish2

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

86Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configbiome.json
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests7 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

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://feedsmith.dev
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics9 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsatom, feed-parser, jsonfeed, rss, rdf, rss-feed, rss-parser, feed-generator, rss-generator
has_wikino
homepagehttps://feedsmith.dev
docs_sitehttps://feedsmith.dev
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

41Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests7 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained27 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities112 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, 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.

49Weak · 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
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configbiome.json
11/11Static type checkingcompatibility/explicit-modules/cjs-package/tsconfig.json, compatibility/explicit-modules/esm-package/tsconfig.json, compatibility/explicit-modules/mixed-package/tsconfig.json, compatibility/typescript/legacy-cjs/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
5/8Automated maintenancedependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configscompatibility/explicit-modules/cjs-package/tsconfig.json, compatibility/explicit-modules/esm-package/tsconfig.json, compatibility/explicit-modules/mixed-package/tsconfig.json, compatibility/typescript/legacy-cjs/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeTypeScript (statically typed)
53.8/55Manageable file sizes6/279 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes143,474
source_files_sampled279
oversized_source_files6

Key facts

607GitHub stars
2contributors
556commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
53releases
1bus factor
3open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.1 / 10
4.1aggregate

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 · 2026-07-17 13:55 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 0/21 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained27 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
0Vulnerabilities112 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmentities^7.0.1package.json
npmfast-xml-parser~5.10.0package.json
All dependencies 37

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 35 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmentities^7.0.1direct
npmfast-xml-parser~5.10.0direct
Gogithub.com/andybalholm/cascadiav1.3.3indirect
Gogithub.com/json-iterator/gov1.1.12indirect
Gogithub.com/mmcdole/gofeedv1.3.0indirect
Gogithub.com/mmcdole/goxppv1.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/modern-go/concurrentv0.0.0-20180306012644-bacd9c7ef1ddindirect
Gogithub.com/modern-go/reflect2v1.0.2indirect
Gogithub.com/puerkitobio/goqueryv1.10.3indirect
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.55.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/textv0.37.0indirect
npm@extractus/feed-extractor^7.2.1indirect
npm@gaphub/feed^5.2.4indirect
npm@rowanmanning/feed-parser^2.1.3indirect
npm@types/bun^1.3.1indirect
npm@types/bun^1.3.14indirect
npm@types/feedme^2.0.4indirect
npm@ulisesgascon/rss-feed-parser^1.0.1indirect
npmfeedme^2.0.2indirect
npmfeedparser^2.6.0indirect
npmfeedsmith2.9.4indirect
npmkvalita^1.16.0indirect
npmnode-opml-parser^1.0.0indirect
npmopml^0.5.8indirect
npmopml-generator^1.1.1indirect
npmopml-to-json^1.0.1indirect
npmopmlparser^0.8.0indirect
npmpodcast-feed-parser^1.0.4indirect
npmrss-parser^3.13.0indirect
npmtsdown^0.22.7indirect
npmtypescript^5.9.3indirect
npmtypescript^6.0.3indirect
npmvite^7.1.12indirect
npmvitepress^2.0.0-alpha.18indirect
Packagistsimplepie/simplepieindirect
PyPIfeedparserindirect
RubyGemsfeedjiraindirect
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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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