Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-08 21:13 UTC

meltano / edk

Meltano extension development kit

Python · JinjaApache-2.0★ 9 stars⑂ 9 forkssince Aug 2022View on GitHub ↗

meltano/edk holds a health index of 84 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (92/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (43/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

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.

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)

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 71 is calibrated to 84 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

MeltanoOrganization

186 followers73 public repossince Oct 2018

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish	Tags
PyPI	meltano.edk	0.6.1	-	11	11 days ago	meltano meltano-edk meltano-extension

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

81Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

84Excellent

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 4 days ago
21.5/36	Commit cadence — 31/52 weeks with commits
16.3/18	Commit volume — 64 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 22 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	64
human_commit_share	0.1
days_since_last_push	4
active_weeks_last_year	31

Release discipline

76Good

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 11 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 11 days ago
12.6/27	Release cadence — a release every ~140.5 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.

Inputs used

releases_count	11
latest_release_tag	v0.6.1
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	11
mean_days_between_releases	140.5

Community & Adoption

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

43Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

24At Risk

How it's scored

14.6/60	Stars — 9 stars
7.5/25	Forks — 9 forks
1.7/15	Watchers — 3 watchers

Inputs used

forks	9
stars	9
watchers	3
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

65Good

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	1
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	yes
readme_badge_services	readthedocs.org
has_pull_request_template	no

Sustainability & Governance

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

68Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

35Weak

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6.3/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 72% of commits
9.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 7 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	7
top_contributor_share	0.718

Issue & PR responsiveness

61Moderate

How it's scored

24.4/42	Issue resolution — 58% of issues closed
28.8/30	PR acceptance — 452/471 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/4 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

merged_prs	452
open_issues	13
closed_issues	18
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	0
prs_decided_30d	0
issue_closed_ratio	0.581
closed_unmerged_prs	19
first_time_authors_30d	0
first_time_prs_merged_30d	0
first_time_prs_decided_30d	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

89Excellent

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
16.3/25	Owner reach — 186 followers of meltano
25/25	Track record — 73 public repos, account ~7 yr old

Inputs used

followers	186
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	—
owner_login	meltano
public_repos	73
account_age_days	2,866

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 11 days ago
20/20	Version history — 11 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	meltano.edk
ecosystems	pypi
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	11

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

92Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

94Exceptional

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — .flake8
9.6/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
20/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 27 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	yes
has_precommit_config	yes

Documentation

90Excellent

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://edk.meltano.com
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 3 topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	meltano, python, sdk
has_wiki	no
homepage	https://edk.meltano.com
docs_site	https://edk.meltano.com
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	yes
has_description	yes

Security

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

73Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

66Good

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5	CI-Tests — 27 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5	Code-Review — Found 0/4 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 22 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5	Packaging — packaging workflow detected
5/5	Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
5/5	SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5	Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	18
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	0
scorecard_aggregate	6.6

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	0
affected_packages	0
assessed_packages	7
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	none
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the pypi:meltano.edk@0.6.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 7 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.

57Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40	Legible commit history — no data

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
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.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

90Excellent

How it's scored

18/18	One-command bootstrap — docs/Makefile
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — .flake8
11/11	Static type checking — meltano/py.typed
10/10	Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8	Automated maintenance — 49 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	uv.lock
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	no
bootstrap_files	docs/Makefile
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	meltano/py.typed
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	—
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.49

Code legibility for models

82Excellent

How it's scored

27/45	Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (meltano/py.typed)
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/11 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Python
largest_source_bytes	5,734
source_files_sampled	11
oversized_source_files	0

Key facts

9GitHub stars

7contributors

64commits, last 12 months

4days since last push

11releases

1bus factor

13open issues

PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 9 ⇿

0Stars

9Forks

9Releases

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.

Major 0Minor 3Patch 5

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.6 / 10

6.6aggregate

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 · 2026-08-08 21:13 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
3	Branch-Protection	branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10	CI-Tests	27 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0	Code-Review	Found 0/4 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10	Contributors	project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	22 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10	Packaging	packaging workflow detected
10	Pinned-Dependencies	all dependencies are pinned
10	SAST	SAST tool is run on all commits
10	Security-Policy	security policy file detected
0	Signed-Releases	Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10	Vulnerabilities	0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 3

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
PyPI	structlog	`>=21,<27`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	PyYAML	`>=6,<7`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	devtools	`>=0.9.0,<1`	pyproject.toml

All dependencies 83

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 80 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
PyPI	devtools	`0.12.2`	direct
PyPI	pyyaml	`6.0.3`	direct
PyPI	structlog	`26.1.0`	direct
PyPI	accessible-pygments	`0.0.5`	indirect
PyPI	alabaster	`1.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	annotated-doc	`0.0.4`	indirect
PyPI	annotated-types	`0.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	anyio	`4.14.2`	indirect
PyPI	ast-serialize	`0.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	asttokens	`2.4.1`	indirect
PyPI	babel	`2.18.0`	indirect
PyPI	beautifulsoup4	`4.15.0`	indirect
PyPI	certifi	`2026.6.17`	indirect
PyPI	charset-normalizer	`3.4.9`	indirect
PyPI	click	`8.4.2`	indirect
PyPI	colorama	`0.4.6`	indirect
PyPI	copier	`9.17.0`	indirect
PyPI	docutils	`0.21.2`	indirect
PyPI	docutils	`0.22.4`	indirect
PyPI	dunamai	`1.26.1`	indirect
PyPI	exceptiongroup	`1.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	executing	`2.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	funcy	`2.0`	indirect
PyPI	furo	`2025.12.19`	indirect
PyPI	h11	`0.16.0`	indirect
PyPI	idna	`3.18`	indirect
PyPI	imagesize	`2.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	iniconfig	`2.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	jinja2	`3.1.6`	indirect
PyPI	jinja2-ansible-filters	`1.3.2`	indirect
PyPI	librt	`0.13.0`	indirect
PyPI	markdown-it-py	`3.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	markdown-it-py	`4.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	markupsafe	`3.0.3`	indirect
PyPI	mdit-py-plugins	`0.6.1`	indirect
PyPI	mdurl	`0.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	mypy	`2.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	mypy-extensions	`1.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	myst-parser	`4.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	myst-parser	`5.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	packaging	`26.2`	indirect
PyPI	pathspec	`1.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	platformdirs	`4.10.0`	indirect
PyPI	pluggy	`1.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	plumbum	`2.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	prompt-toolkit	`3.0.52`	indirect
PyPI	pydantic	`2.13.4`	indirect
PyPI	pydantic-core	`2.46.4`	indirect
PyPI	pygments	`2.20.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest	`9.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	questionary	`2.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	requests	`2.34.2`	indirect
PyPI	rich	`15.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	roman-numerals	`4.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	ruff	`0.16.0`	indirect
PyPI	shellingham	`1.5.4`	indirect
PyPI	six	`1.17.0`	indirect
PyPI	snowballstemmer	`3.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	soupsieve	`2.8.4`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx	`8.1.3`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx	`9.0.4`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx	`9.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx-autobuild	`2024.10.3`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx-autobuild	`2025.8.25`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx-basic-ng	`1.0.0b2`	indirect
PyPI	sphinx-copybutton	`0.5.2`	indirect
PyPI	sphinxcontrib-applehelp	`2.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	sphinxcontrib-devhelp	`2.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	sphinxcontrib-htmlhelp	`2.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	sphinxcontrib-jsmath	`1.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	sphinxcontrib-qthelp	`2.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	sphinxcontrib-serializinghtml	`2.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	starlette	`1.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	tomli	`2.4.1`	indirect
PyPI	typer	`0.27.0`	indirect
PyPI	types-pyyaml	`6.0.12.20260724`	indirect
PyPI	typing-extensions	`4.16.0`	indirect
PyPI	typing-inspection	`0.4.2`	indirect
PyPI	urllib3	`2.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	uvicorn	`0.51.0`	indirect
PyPI	watchfiles	`1.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	wcwidth	`0.8.2`	indirect
PyPI	websockets	`16.1`	indirect

Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:meltano.edk@0.6.1 pulls in 7 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.

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records