Public record
Software health reportschema 0.14.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-18 21:24 UTC

martincostello / xunit-logging

Logging extensions for xunit

C#Apache-2.0★ 310 stars⑂ 15 forkssince Aug 2018View on GitHub ↗

martincostello/xunit-logging holds a health index of 92 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (90/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (69/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

92
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.

92
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 78 is calibrated to 92 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Martin CostelloPersonal account
694 followers202 public repossince Feb 2012@grafana

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

90Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

100Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 1 days ago
36/36Commit cadence52/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume325 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year325
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year52
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases17 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 138 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~188.2 days
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count17
latest_release_tagv0.7.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release138
mean_days_between_releases188.2

Community & Adoption

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

75Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
40.4/60Stars310 stars
9.6/25Forks15 forks
3.3/15Watchers5 watchers
Inputs used
forks15
stars310
watchers5
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

100Exceptional
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
7.2/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

69Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 33% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth11 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled11
top_contributor_share0.334
How it's scored
36/42Issue resolution86% of issues closed
28.7/30PR acceptance1,236/1,294 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/2 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs1,236
open_issues4
closed_issues24
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.857
closed_unmerged_prs58
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
20.4/25Owner reach694 followers of martincostello
25/25Track record202 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers694
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginmartincostello
public_repos202
account_age_days5,267
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows9 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://blog.martincostello.com/writing-logs-to-xunit-test-output/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsxunit, logging, dotnet-core
has_wikino
homepagehttps://blog.martincostello.com/writing-logs-to-xunit-test-output/
docs_sitehttps://blog.martincostello.com/writing-logs-to-xunit-test-output/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

80Excellent · 16% of overall

Security posture

80Excellent
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
1.2/2.5CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: Passing
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/2 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
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
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
5/5Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
5/5SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
6/7.5Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate8

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.

74Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes5,612
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
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingC# (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentdevcontainer
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
5/8Automated maintenancedependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
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 codeC# (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/34 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC#
largest_source_bytes22,376
source_files_sampled34
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

310GitHub stars
11contributors
325commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
17releases
2bus factor
4open issues
package ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 8.0 / 10
8.0aggregate

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 · 2026-07-18 21:24 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
5CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: Passing
0Code-ReviewFound 0/2 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
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
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
8Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 75

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 75 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
NuGetCastle.Core5.1.1indirect
NuGetcoverlet.msbuild10.0.1indirect
NuGetDiffEngine11.3.0indirect
NuGetEmptyFiles4.4.0indirect
NuGetGitHubActionsTestLogger3.0.4indirect
NuGetJunitXml.TestLogger8.0.0indirect
NuGetMartinCostello.BuildKit0.8.11indirect
NuGetMartinCostello.Logging.XUnit0.7.1indirect
NuGetMartinCostello.Logging.XUnit.v30.7.1indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.App.Ref8.0.29indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Testing10.0.10indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.AspNetCore.TestHost10.0.10indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Bcl.AsyncInterfaces6.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Bcl.AsyncInterfaces8.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.PublicApiAnalyzers5.6.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeCoverage18.8.1indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection10.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection8.0.1indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection.Abstractions10.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection.Abstractions8.0.2indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.DependencyModel10.0.10indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging10.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging8.0.1indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions10.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions8.0.2indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Options10.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Options8.0.2indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Primitives10.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Primitives8.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk18.8.1indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.NETCore.App.Ref8.0.29indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.NETCore.Platforms1.1.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.NETFramework.ReferenceAssemblies1.0.3indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.NETFramework.ReferenceAssemblies.net4721.0.3indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.TestPlatform.ObjectModel18.8.1indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.TestPlatform.TestHost18.8.1indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Win32.Registry5.0.0indirect
NuGetNETStandard.Library2.0.3indirect
NuGetNSubstitute6.0.0indirect
NuGetReferenceTrimmer3.5.7indirect
NuGetReportGenerator5.5.10indirect
NuGetShouldly4.3.0indirect
NuGetStyleCop.Analyzers1.2.0-beta.556indirect
NuGetStyleCop.Analyzers.Unstable1.2.0.556indirect
NuGetSystem.Buffers4.5.1indirect
NuGetSystem.CodeDom6.0.0indirect
NuGetSystem.ComponentModel.Annotations5.0.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Diagnostics.DiagnosticSource8.0.1indirect
NuGetSystem.Management6.0.1indirect
NuGetSystem.Memory4.5.5indirect
NuGetSystem.Numerics.Vectors4.4.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Numerics.Vectors4.5.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Runtime.CompilerServices.Unsafe6.0.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Threading.Tasks.Extensions4.5.4indirect
NuGetSystem.ValueTuple4.5.0indirect
NuGetxunit2.9.3indirect
NuGetxunit.abstractions2.0.3indirect
NuGetxunit.analyzers1.18.0indirect
NuGetxunit.analyzers1.27.0indirect
NuGetxunit.assert2.9.3indirect
NuGetxunit.core2.9.3indirect
NuGetxunit.extensibility.core2.6.6indirect
NuGetxunit.extensibility.core2.9.3indirect
NuGetxunit.extensibility.execution2.6.6indirect
NuGetxunit.extensibility.execution2.9.3indirect
NuGetxunit.runner.visualstudio3.1.5indirect
NuGetxunit.v3.assert3.2.2indirect
NuGetxunit.v3.common2.0.1indirect
NuGetxunit.v3.common3.2.2indirect
NuGetxunit.v3.core.mtp-off3.2.2indirect
NuGetxunit.v3.extensibility.core2.0.1indirect
NuGetxunit.v3.extensibility.core3.2.2indirect
NuGetxunit.v3.mtp-off3.2.2indirect
NuGetxunit.v3.runner.common3.2.2indirect
NuGetxunit.v3.runner.inproc.console3.2.2indirect
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 v0.14.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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